Teams

Acers Hagy RTC

2026 USTA League Tennis Adult 18 & Over Summer-RO · 4.0 Women

18 players · average NTRP 3.83 / NORTHERN

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 →
Schedule9 played
2026-07-21vs Yes We Khan RACWon 32
W#1 DoublesAni Bulbulian / Lori Mosser vs Paige Partain / Pamela Sinicrope7-5, 6-3
L#1 SinglesKaren Borges vs Rachel Kamath2-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesLisa Teske / Kris Allen vs Caitlin Roth / Jennifer Stewart1-6, 0-6
W#2 SinglesHeshan Liu vs Ella Seehafer6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesDawn Wildfeuer / Sarah Bauer vs Sarah Chalmers / Donna Dozois7-5, 7-5
2026-07-14vs Yes We Khan RACWon 32
W#1 DoublesNatalie Hagy / Heidi Strumpfer vs Paige Partain / Pamela Sinicrope6-1, 7-6
W#1 SinglesKaren Borges vs Rachel Kamath6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesLixia Yang / Dawn Wildfeuer vs Rhonda Khan / Jodi Kruse3-6, 3-6
W#2 SinglesSarah Bauer vs Megan Reps6-3, 6-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLisa Teske / Madison Couser vs Sarah Chalmers / Jessica Wang2-6, 3-6
2026-06-30vs Yes We Khan RACWon 41
W#1 DoublesAni Bulbulian / Lori Mosser vs Erin Witter / Rhonda Khan6-2, 6-3
W#1 SinglesKeely Ryder vs Cherisse Marcou6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesHeidi Strumpfer / Kris Allen vs Jodi Kruse / Caitlin Roth6-1, 6-0
L#2 SinglesMichaela Nachtigall vs Megan Reps7-5, 1-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesMadison Couser / Dana Erickson vs Donna Dozois / Sarah Chalmers6-0, 6-3
2026-06-23vs Yes We Khan RACWon 32
W#1 DoublesAni Bulbulian / Keely Ryder vs Jennifer Stewart / Paige Partain6-3, 6-1
L#1 SinglesLixia Yang vs Erin Witter6-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesNatalie Hagy / Ellyn Grossen vs Rhonda Khan / Jodi Kruse1-6, 3-6
W#2 SinglesMichaela Nachtigall vs Megan Reps6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMabel Ryder / Heshan Liu vs Jorden Ruskell / Donna Dozois6-3, 7-5
2026-06-16vs Yes We Khan RACLost 14
L#1 DoublesNatalie Hagy / Karen Borges vs Rhonda Khan / Paige Partain2-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesMichaela Nachtigall vs Rachel Kamath6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesEllyn Grossen / Kris Allen vs Jennifer Stewart / Pamela Sinicrope1-6, 4-6
L#2 SinglesLixia Yang vs Ella Seehafer4-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesMabel Ryder / Keely Ryder vs Caitlin Roth / Anne Colby6-3, 6-2
2026-06-09vs Yes We Khan RACLost 23
W#1 DoublesNatalie Hagy / Ellyn Grossen vs Pamela Sinicrope / Jennifer Stewart6-7, 6-4, 1-0
L#1 SinglesKaren Borges vs Rachel Kamath3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesMabel Ryder / Keely Ryder vs Jorden Ruskell / Donna Dozois7-5, 6-4
L#2 SinglesHeshan Liu vs Erin Witter1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesLisa Teske / Lixia Yang vs Brittany Luther / Jessica Wang6-7, 4-6
2026-06-02vs Yes We Khan RACWon 32
L#1 DoublesAni Bulbulian / Ellyn Grossen vs Rhonda Khan / Paige Partain2-6, 6-7
L#1 SinglesMichaela Nachtigall vs Erin Witter5-7, 6-1, 0-1
W#2 DoublesLixia Yang / Dawn Wildfeuer vs Ella Dozois / Jorden Ruskell6-0, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesTaylor Julsrud vs Megan Reps2-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSarah Bauer / Madison Couser vs Anne Colby / Jennifer Stewart2-6, 6-2, 1-0
2026-05-26vs Yes We Khan RACWon 41
W#1 DoublesKris Allen / Ani Bulbulian vs Ella Dozois / Jorden Ruskell6-1, 6-2
W#1 SinglesTaylor Julsrud vs Erin Witter5-7, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKeely Ryder / Mabel Ryder vs Rhonda Khan / Pamela Sinicrope6-1, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 SinglesHeshan Liu vs Cherisse Marcou6-1, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesNatalie Hagy / Karen Borges vs Jodi Kruse / Anne Colby2-6, 6-1, 1-0
2026-05-19vs Yes We Khan RACWon 32
W#1 DoublesNatalie Hagy / Heidi Strumpfer vs Ella Seehafer / Sarah Chalmers6-1, 6-1
L#1 SinglesMichaela Nachtigall vs Rachel Kamath4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesEllyn Grossen / Ani Bulbulian vs Jodi Kruse / Caitlin Roth6-2, 6-0
W#2 SinglesLixia Yang vs Megan Reps6-3, 5-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMabel Ryder / Madison Couser vs Jessica Wang / Brittany Luther1-6, 4-6
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 standings2 teams · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Acers Hagy RTC72261947379
2Yes We Khan RAC27192657437

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 3.61 estimated across 17 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.

3.99
Keely Ryder
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.92
Ani Bulbulian
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.91
Heidi Strumpfer
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.85
Michaela Nachtigall
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #2 Singles 40% · published
3.80
Natalie Hagy
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
3.75
Taylor Julsrud
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
Dana Erickson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Kris Allen
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.69
Karen Borges
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.68
Lixia Yang
usually #2 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.66
Lori Mosser
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.59
Ellyn Grossen
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.51
Sarah Bauer
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.45
Dawn Wildfeuer
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.29
Mabel Ryder
usually #3 Doubles 36%, also #2 Singles 27% · published
3.27
Heshan Liu
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.14
Madison Couser
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.06
Lisa Teske
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 17% · 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.

Dawn Wildfeuer + Lixia Yang4153% games−0.8% vs expected
Natalie Hagy + Karen Borges3256% gamesnot enough data
Ani Bulbulian + Lori Mosser5068% gamesnot enough data
Natalie Hagy + Heidi Strumpfer404 matchesnot enough data
Ellyn Grossen + Kris Allen314 matchesnot enough data
Mabel Ryder + Lisa Teske134 matchesnot enough data
Mabel Ryder + Lixia Yang213 matchesnot enough data
Mabel Ryder + Keely Ryder213 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.

Keely Ryder
4W–1L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
3.99
4
Ani Bulbulian
21W–5L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%71%29%
3.92
Heidi Strumpfer
10W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
3.91
Michaela Nachtigall
10W–5L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%86%14%
3.85
Natalie Hagy
16W–8L career · 6 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.80
Taylor Julsrud
3W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.75
4
Dana Erickson
1W–0L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Kris Allen
11W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.72
Karen Borges
6W–8L career · 5 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.69
Lixia Yang
29W–9L career · 6 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.68
Lori Mosser
18W–33L career · 2 lines in 2026
12%87%1%
3.66
Ellyn Grossen
5W–4L career · 5 lines in 2026
26%74%<1%
3.59
Sarah Bauer
22W–7L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%48%52%
3.51
3.5
Dawn Wildfeuer
20W–3L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%64%36%
3.45
Mabel Ryder
18W–26L career · 10 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.29
Heshan Liu
22W–4L career · 6 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Madison Couser
25W–17L career · 12 lines in 2026
16%84%1%
3.14
Lisa Teske
13W–17L career · 6 lines in 2026
34%66%<1%
3.06

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.