Teams

CP:Tri-Harder:das Neves

2024 SCT Tri-Level · Tri-Level Women DAY 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 (1

17 players · average NTRP 3.71 / SOUTHERN CONNECTICUT

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2023-11-29vs NC:Triple Threat:KanterLost 02
L#2 DoublesJamie Behr / Stefanie Vitti vs Agnes Temerowski / Erin Kanter6-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesLillian Pascale / Emily Salmore vs Brooke Jaeger / Caroline Turpin3-6, 4-6
2023-11-21vs GCC:Jedlicka/CabreraLost 12
W#1 DoublesMeaghan Nolan / Karen Bogdan vs Cecilie Jedlicka / Susanna Nichols5-7, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesStefanie Vitti / Kelly Warrick vs Dawn Israel / Susan Carroll3-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesDeanna Rahman / Emily Salmore vs Allison Hickey / Margaret Steinbach0-6, 2-6
2023-11-06vs GCC:Jedlicka/CabreraWon 21
W#1 DoublesKaren Bogdan / Meaghan Nolan vs Mary Pat Greeff / Susanna Nichols6-0, 6-2
L#2 DoublesValerie Rickens / Jamie Behr vs Patricia Hopper / Laura Smith6-1, 6-7, 0-1
W#3 DoublesEmily Salmore / Kathleen DiSalvatore vs Ashley Smith / Emily Trammell6-3, 6-4
2023-10-27vs 4S:Triple Threat:AmadeoSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMaria Das Neves / Marjorie Eilertsen vs Cheryl Levine / Jennifer Amadeo7-5, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesBarbara May / Kathleen DiSalvatore vs Jennifer Bell / Carrie Mattison6-3, 6-4
2023-10-09vs NC:Triple Threat:KanterWon 30
W#1 DoublesMeaghan Nolan / Karen Bogdan vs Deb Parnes / Jennifer Weitz6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesStefanie Vitti / Kelly Warrick vs Eleanor Lasko / Agnes Temerowski6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesEmily Salmore / Barbara May vs Brooke Jaeger / Caroline Turpin6-4, 7-5
2023-09-14vs 4S:Triple Threat:AmadeoSplit 11
L#2 DoublesKerri Arnold / Stefanie Vitti vs Lisa DiCandido / Flavia Lodato4-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesEmily Salmore / Lillian Pascale vs Kelly Chapple / Toni Tuohy6-3, 6-2
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.

Flight standings for Tri-Level Women DAY 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 (1 have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

Roster averages 3.44 estimated across 11 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

4.07
Melissa Straub
published 4
3.87
Meaghan Nolan
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
3.82
Marjorie Eilertsen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Alison Bresnahan
published 4
3.65
Ashley Sullivan
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.38
Jamie Behr
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.34
Kathleen DiSalvatore
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.34
Stefanie Vitti
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.27
Maria Das Neves
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.14
Barbara May
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.01
Emily Salmore
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.93
Deanna Rahman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Karen Bogdan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Kelly Warrick
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kerri Arnold
published
Lillian Pascale
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Valerie Rickens
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

Kathleen DiSalvatore + Emily Salmore4256% games+9.9% vs expected
Stefanie Vitti + Kelly Warrick7754% games+7.5% vs expected
Ashley Sullivan + Meaghan Nolan561358% games+7.1% vs expected
Stefanie Vitti + Valerie Rickens9359% games+4.0% vs expected
Meaghan Nolan + Karen Bogdan3551% games−2.1% vs expected
Alison Bresnahan + Meaghan Nolan3349% games−5.5% vs expected
Maria Das Neves + Ashley Sullivan314 matchesnot enough data
Stefanie Vitti + Kerri Arnold213 matchesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

4
Melissa Straub
204W–69L career · no lines in 2024
<1%31%69%
4.07
Meaghan Nolan
88W–37L career · 7 lines in 2024
<1%82%17%
3.87
Marjorie Eilertsen
123W–84L career · 1 line in 2024
1%89%10%
3.82
4
Alison Bresnahan
36W–11L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
4
Ashley Sullivan
85W–23L career · 5 lines in 2024
15%85%1%
3.65
Jamie Behr
165W–105L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%80%20%
3.38
3.5
Kathleen DiSalvatore
196W–171L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%86%13%
3.34
Stefanie Vitti
128W–99L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%87%13%
3.34
3.5
Maria Das Neves
159W–120L career · 1 line in 2024
3%92%5%
3.27
3.5
Barbara May
15W–7L career · 2 lines in 2024
16%84%1%
3.14
Emily Salmore
83W–54L career · 5 lines in 2024
46%54%<1%
3.01
3.5
Deanna Rahman
15W–11L career · 1 line in 2024
69%31%<1%
2.93
Karen Bogdan
23W–23L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Kelly Warrick
96W–57L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Kerri Arnold
31W–22L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Lillian Pascale
23W–12L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Valerie Rickens
58W–42L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.