Teams

ETC:Nut'in to Lose

2023 WMA Tri-Level Fall (2023) · 3.5 Womens 1

4 players · average NTRP 3.50 / WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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 →
Schedule5 played
2023-12-03vs (Q)ETC:Doubles Vision:MacCollLost 01
L#1 DoublesCaroline Sarner / Emily Corriveau vs Carol MacColl / Susan Anderson1-6, 7-6, 0-1
2023-11-26vs BOUS:BWAC Attack:AndrettaWon 10
W#1 DoublesCaroline Sarner / Thip Kophengnavong vs Laurie Andretta / Meghan Huber6-2, 6-2
2023-10-29vs LTC:Stranger Strings:Hoag/CoffeyWon 10
W#1 DoublesCaroline Sarner / Shamy Park vs Anita Hoag / Anya Martin6-4, 0-5, 1-0
2023-10-28vs LTC:MommyAgression:FoardLost 01
L#1 DoublesShamy Park / Emily Corriveau vs Melinda Mason / Michele Kunitz4-6, 1-6
2023-10-08vs LTC:BeaulieuWon 10
W#1 DoublesEmily Corriveau / Thip Kophengnavong vs Moira Donoghue / Louise Sterling6-7, 3-0, 1-0
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 standings6 teams · 3.5 Womens 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1LTC:MommyAgression:Foard4141230
2(Q)ETC:Doubles Vision:MacColl4141332
3ETC:Nut'in to Lose3232645
4LTC:Beaulieu2323851
5BOUS:BWAC Attack:Andretta1414848
6LTC:Stranger Strings:Hoag/Coffey1414948

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.20 estimated across 2 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.

Emily Corriveau
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.20
Caroline Sarner
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.19
Thip Kophengnavong
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Shamy Park
usually #1 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.

Caroline Sarner + Thip Kophengnavong7550% games+3.9% vs expected
Emily Corriveau + Caroline Sarner1447% gamesnot enough data
Emily Corriveau + Thip Kophengnavong404 matchesnot enough data
Emily Corriveau + Shamy Park224 matchesnot enough data
Thip Kophengnavong + Shamy Park303 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.

3.5
Emily Corriveau
26W–31L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
3.5
Caroline Sarner
61W–53L career · 3 lines in 2023
6%93%1%
3.20
Thip Kophengnavong
96W–45L career · 2 lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.19
Shamy Park
45W–10L career · 2 lines in 2023
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.