Teams

Me.Everitt18T3.0

2023 Cap Tri-Level 18 & Over · 3.0-3.5-4.0 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.25 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2023-07-29vs Je.Straughn18TLost 01
L#3 DoublesNiezle Scott / Melanie Lachance vs Sara Mazurak / Elizabeth Marriott4-6, 2-6
2023-07-22vs Ch.Burr18T3.0Won 10
W#3 DoublesNiezle Scott / Lisa Austin vs Lynelle Clark / Susan Cokas6-4, 5-7, 1-0
2023-07-15vs Sh.Cole18TLost 01
L#3 DoublesNiezle Scott / Melanie Lachance vs Katherine Canavan / Shannon Beach2-6, 3-6
2023-07-08vs Da.Haney18TLost 01
L#3 DoublesNiezle Scott / Dana McNally vs Sharon Fred / Beth Robertson1-6, 4-6
2023-06-24Lost 01
L#3 DoublesLisa Austin / Dana McNally vs Jennifer Anderson / Jennifer Straughn1-6, 1-6
2023-06-17vs Ch.Burr18T3.0Lost 01
L#3 DoublesMelanie Lachance / Dana McNally vs Christine Burr / Jennifer Taylor1-6, 0-6
2023-06-03vs Da.Haney18TLost 01
L#3 DoublesMelanie Lachance / Dana McNally vs Sharon Fred / Karen Rose6-4, 0-6, 0-1
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 3.0-3.5-4.0 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 3.24 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.

3.76
Erin McAllister
published
3.71
Janet Sprague
published
3.58
Susan Paeplow
published
3.33
Zana Piric
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.31
Melissa House
published
3.11
Lola Jefferies
published
3.09
Elizabeth Schuette
published
3.08
Camille Gibbs
published 3.5
2.85
Niezle Scott
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.54
Dana McNally
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Laura Rendon
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.

Elizabeth Schuette + Camille Gibbs224 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.

Erin McAllister
26W–20L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%4%
3.76
Janet Sprague
10W–18L career · no lines in 2023
7%91%2%
3.71
Susan Paeplow
4W–9L career · no lines in 2023
28%72%<1%
3.58
3.5
Zana Piric
135W–175L career · 6 lines in 2023
1%88%11%
3.33
Melissa House
20W–19L career · no lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.31
Lola Jefferies
3W–5L career · no lines in 2023
21%79%<1%
3.11
Elizabeth Schuette
7W–12L career · no lines in 2023
26%74%<1%
3.09
3.5
Camille Gibbs
2W–4L career · no lines in 2023
29%71%<1%
3.08
3
Niezle Scott
39W–38L career · 4 lines in 2023
1%85%15%
2.85
3
Dana McNally
32W–67L career · type A · 4 lines in 2023
40%60%<1%
2.54
Laura Rendon
1W–0L career · no lines in 2023
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.