Teams

PCC BLUE

2024 CTA WOMEN'S 2.5 - DEN · WOMEN 2.5 - DEN

7 players · average NTRP 2.88 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule6 played
2024-07-17vs SS-LT NAVYWon 21
W#1 DoublesDawn D'Amato / Marti Longo vs Stephanie Nochlin / Rachel Austin7-5, 6-1
W#1 SinglesRenee Dyer vs Karen Fukuoka6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesErica Haycock / Amy Cook vs Andrea Caldwell / Sophia Caldwell6-1, 4-6, 0-1
2024-07-11vs VCC REDSplit 11
L#1 DoublesAmy Cook / Erica Haycock vs Lauren Kauffman / Aimee Madison6-1, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesRenee Dyer / Mary Jo Haw vs Molly Syke / Lauren Baker6-2, 6-0
2024-07-10vs GAC NAVYSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMelissa Holler / Renee Dyer vs Bridget Haber-Butler / Jennifer Accola6-7, 6-2, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDawn D'Amato / Mary Jo Haw vs Sinead McGuire / Natalie Kakaty6-1, 6-3
2024-07-03vs CCV BLUEWon 10
W#1 DoublesAmy Cook / Renee Dyer vs Clara Carpenter / Nicky Fleming6-0, 6-0
2024-06-19vs RRTC NAVYWon 10
W#1 DoublesErica Haycock / Amy Cook vs Sonia Blumenblat / Yujeong Choi6-2, 6-4
2024-06-05vs CPV BLUEWon 10
W#1 DoublesMelissa Holler / Renee Dyer vs Teri Aplin / Mandy Short6-4, 6-1
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 WOMEN 2.5 - DEN 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 2.52 estimated across 6 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.

2.86
Amy Cook
published 3
2.72
Erica Haycock
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.71
Renee Dyer
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.32
Marti Longo
published
2.27
Mary Jo Haw
published
2.24
Dawn D'Amato
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
Melissa Holler
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.

Erica Haycock + Dawn D'Amato9460% games+12.1% vs expected
Renee Dyer + Amy Cook5254% games+6.1% vs expected
Erica Haycock + Renee Dyer4457% games+5.8% vs expected
Dawn D'Amato + Renee Dyer3447% gamesnot enough data
Erica Haycock + Amy Cook213 matchesnot enough data
Dawn D'Amato + Marti Longo123 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
Amy Cook
20W–12L career · no lines in 2024
1%84%15%
2.86
3
Erica Haycock
40W–31L career · 3 lines in 2024
6%92%2%
2.72
3
Renee Dyer
80W–48L career · 5 lines in 2024
7%91%2%
2.71
Marti Longo
12W–14L career · no lines in 2024
90%10%<1%
2.32
Mary Jo Haw
0W–4L career · no lines in 2024
95%5%<1%
2.27
2.5
Dawn D'Amato
46W–43L career · 2 lines in 2024
0%97%3%
2.24
Melissa Holler
2W–6L career · no lines in 2024
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.