Teams

GS-Fountain

2022 Tri-Level 18 & Over Day Leagues - GS · 3.0

9 players · average NTRP 3.50 / ALABAMA

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 →

Flight standings for 3.0 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 3.25 estimated across 7 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.

3.57
3.54
Meredith Portman
published
3.36
Mary Bradley
published
3.33
Roxanne Bates
published
3.21
Michelle Fountain
published
3.13
Michelle Greene
published
Amanda Bowab
published 3
2.64
Kathy Ragland
published
Jane Rivers
published
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
Cynthia Cleverdon
19W–22L career · no lines in 2022
29%71%<1%
3.57
Meredith Portman
6W–17L career · no lines in 2022
37%63%<1%
3.54
Mary Bradley
37W–32L career · no lines in 2022
<1%86%14%
3.36
Roxanne Bates
13W–12L career · no lines in 2022
1%89%10%
3.33
Michelle Fountain
11W–9L career · no lines in 2022
5%93%1%
3.21
Michelle Greene
19W–7L career · no lines in 2022
16%84%<1%
3.13
3
Amanda Bowab
1W–1L career · type S · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Kathy Ragland
3W–6L career · no lines in 2022
14%85%<1%
2.64
Jane Rivers
0W–5L career · no lines in 2022
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.