Teams

Morgan-Mazarick

2022 Sandhills Adult 18 & over · 3.5 Adult Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2022-05-02Lost 01
L#3 DoublesJennifer Fincher / Laurie Cherry vs Megan Smith / Lily Li0-6, 2-6
2022-04-25vs Zoppi - L&TWon 10
W#2 DoublesKim Hasty / Lynn Floyd vs Amity Aldridge / Katrina Bullard6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2022-04-04vs Zoppi - L&TLost 01
L#2 SinglesLaurie Cherry vs Megan Hunt0-6, 0-6
2022-03-21vs Zoppi - L&TLost 01
L#1 DoublesSandra Jones / Kim Hasty vs Tanya Zoppi / Kailey Parziale3-6, 1-6
2022-03-14vs Zoppi - L&TLost 02
L#2 DoublesKim Hasty / Lisa Maher vs Katrina Bullard / Amity Aldridge2-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesLynn Floyd / Laurie Cherry vs Anna Marie McNamara / Jennifer Berk2-6, 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 standings for 3.5 Adult Women 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 3.30 estimated across 10 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.

3.81
Rosemary McLean
published
3.60
Christina Powers
published 4
3.51
Mary Hannah Vaughan
published
3.40
Pia Thompson
published
3.35
Kim Hasty
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.29
Sajata Strong
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.18
Dawn Dixon
published 3.5
3.01
Lynn Floyd
published
2.96
Laurie Cherry
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.88
Jennifer Fincher
published
Lisa Maher
published
Sandra Jones
published
Teresa MacK
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.

Kim Hasty + Sajata Strong6165% gamesnot enough data
Mary Hannah Vaughan + Christina Powers2340% gamesnot enough data
Lynn Floyd + Laurie Cherry224 matchesnot enough data
Sandra Jones + Laurie Cherry224 matchesnot enough data
Kim Hasty + Laurie Cherry224 matchesnot enough data
Kim Hasty + Dawn Dixon213 matchesnot enough data
Dawn Dixon + Rosemary McLean213 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.

Rosemary McLean
16W–8L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%7%
3.81
4
Christina Powers
30W–45L career · no lines in 2022
21%79%<1%
3.60
Mary Hannah Vaughan
28W–27L career · no lines in 2022
46%54%<1%
3.51
Pia Thompson
17W–15L career · no lines in 2022
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Kim Hasty
148W–106L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%87%13%
3.35
3.5
Sajata Strong
108W–88L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.29
3.5
Dawn Dixon
33W–30L career · no lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.18
Lynn Floyd
33W–45L career · no lines in 2022
47%53%<1%
3.01
3
Laurie Cherry
93W–106L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%62%38%
2.96
Jennifer Fincher
18W–26L career · no lines in 2022
82%18%<1%
2.88
Lisa Maher
10W–8L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Sandra Jones
27W–27L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Teresa MacK
2W–1L 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.