← Teams

MV-Gwin

2023 Adult 18 & Over · 3.0 Women

5 players · average NTRP 2.75 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 2.61 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.

—
Stephanie Harbell
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 13% · published 3
2.69
Kathryn Harlan
usually #3 Doubles 30%, also #1 Doubles 30% · published 3
2.53
Irina Stolerman
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
—
Jennifer Gwin
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 2.5
—
Patricia Kuchar
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 0
Results13 ties
2023-09-30Split 1–1
W#1 DoublesAlex Harbell / Stephanie Harbell vs Kim Carey / Luis Enriquez6-2, 6-2
L#3 DoublesMichael Kardas / Kathryn Harlan vs Daniel Yoon / Deidra Ducheane6-0, 6-1
2023-09-29Lost 0–1
L#3 DoublesMichael Kardas / Kathryn Harlan vs Steve Rudolf / Pamela Kohler6-1, 6-2
2023-09-29Lost 0–1
L#3 DoublesStephanie Harbell / Michael Kardas vs Allison Erickson / Antonio Monterrosa6-2, 6-3
2023-03-25Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesPatricia Kuchar / Linda Engelsiepen vs Jennifer Pultz / Penny Langhammer6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesAnne Johnson / Jennifer Gwin vs Katja Daoud / Yone Akagi4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2023-03-18Won 1–0
W#1 DoublesRoger Gwin / Stephanie Harbell vs Christian Paulsen / Mary Green-Zwemke2-6, 6-4, 1-0
2023-03-17Split 1–1
W#1 DoublesRoger Gwin / Stephanie Harbell vs Shawn Boyce / Shannon Chen3-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMichael Kardas / Kathryn Harlan vs Mubashir Cheema / Helen Chen5-7, 6-4, 1-0
2023-03-11Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesAnne Johnson / Jennifer Gwin vs Lynda Gordon / Judy Chaput6-4, 6-4
L#1 SinglesKathryn Harlan vs Catherine Huang6-0, 6-1
2023-03-05Lost 1–2
W#1 DoublesAnne Johnson / Stephanie Harbell vs Kathy Cooke / Kate Quisling6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesJennifer Gwin / Noelle Hamilton vs Penny Langhammer / Kathleen Crowley6-3, 6-0
L#2 SinglesKathryn Harlan vs Lauren Stover6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2023-02-12Split 2–2
W#1 DoublesStephanie Harbell / Anne Johnson vs Shelly Bigley / Wendy Whitsell6-2, 5-7, 1-0
L#1 SinglesIrina Stolerman vs Gretchen Sturm6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesKathryn Harlan / Brenda Hudson vs Jennifer Bifano / Barbara Gram3-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJennifer Gwin / Stephanie Pelton vs Molly Hisatomi / Abigail Cupper6-0, 6-1
2023-02-04Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesAnne Johnson / Kathryn Harlan vs SHAWNA THOMPSON / Ashley Sajadi6-3, 7-5
L#2 DoublesPatricia Kuchar / Bethanie DeRoux vs Rachel Medrano / Allison Bader6-3, 6-0
2023-01-29Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesKathryn Harlan / Stephanie Harbell vs Kelsey McGinnis / Julia Plowman6-1, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJennifer Gwin / Trish Peters vs Heather Matteri / Megan Ullmann6-0, 6-0
2023-01-21Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesCarrie Schill / Kathryn Harlan vs Diana Crawford / April Mayers6-3, 6-2
L#1 SinglesStephanie Harbell vs Lisa McConachie6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJennifer Gwin / Trish Peters vs Mckenzie Crawford / Denise Butchee6-1, 7-6
2023-01-07Lost 0–3
L#1 SinglesPatricia Kuchar vs Devrie Brennan6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesJennifer Gwin / Trish Peters vs Monet Hammond / Becky Coder6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesKathryn Harlan / Noelle Hamilton vs Lisa Kearns - (DQ) / Shaun Anderson6-0, 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.
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.

3
Stephanie Harbell
70W–26L career
not enough data
—
3
Kathryn Harlan
20W–40L career
14%84%3%
2.69
2.5
Irina Stolerman
24W–47L career
0%34%66%
2.53
2.5
Jennifer Gwin
34W–47L career
not enough data
—
0
Patricia Kuchar
24W–44L career
not enough data
—

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.