Teams

LCTA18/Zetrouer/MPR

2022 LCTA 18 & Over Fall League · 18 & over Fall League Women 4.0 Day

13 players · average NTRP 3.90 / SOUTH CAROLINA

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 →
Schedule3 played
2022-10-19vs LCTA18/Bright/DICWon 10
W#1 DoublesAmy Frain / Emily Hyder vs Molly Henry / Jennifer Greeno7-5, 6-7, 1-0
2022-10-12vs LCTA18/Eckhardt/MPRWon 10
W#1 DoublesLisa Brechtel / Amy Frain vs Lindsey Johnson / Juliann Loesch6-2, 6-3
2022-09-28vs LCTA18/Prezioso/CTCWon 10
W#1 DoublesAmy Frain / Lisa Brechtel vs Diana Shirley / Karen Belanger6-4, 6-0
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 18 & over Fall League Women 4.0 Day 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 3.67 estimated across 8 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.

3.91
Viktoria Payne
published
3.90
Christy Jervey
published 4
3.88
Marcia Dickman
published
3.78
Krisha McCoy
published
Emily Hyder
published 4
3.69
Cassandra Andrus
published 4
3.66
Amy Frain
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.33
Susan Schnorr
published
3.25
Beth Hasty
published 3.5
Leisa Fingar
published
Lisa Brechtel
published
Louann Kelly
published
Tina Reid
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.

Marcia Dickman + Viktoria Payne22562% games+4.7% vs expected
Marcia Dickman + Leisa Fingar81053% games+3.1% vs expected
Viktoria Payne + Cassandra Andrus9651% games+1.4% vs expected
Viktoria Payne + Tina Reid7852% games−4.5% vs expected
Louann Kelly + Cassandra Andrus1438% games−16.3% vs expected
Marcia Dickman + Cassandra Andrus134 matchesnot enough data
Marcia Dickman + Susan Schnorr123 matchesnot enough data
Susan Schnorr + Leisa Fingar033 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.

Viktoria Payne
75W–49L career · no lines in 2022
<1%75%24%
3.91
4
Christy Jervey
7W–12L career · no lines in 2022
<1%79%21%
3.90
Marcia Dickman
48W–42L career · no lines in 2022
<1%82%17%
3.88
Krisha McCoy
57W–33L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.78
4
Emily Hyder
1W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Cassandra Andrus
56W–45L career · no lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Amy Frain
42W–28L career · 3 lines in 2022
10%89%<1%
3.66
Susan Schnorr
14W–25L career · no lines in 2022
91%9%<1%
3.33
3.5
Beth Hasty
30W–24L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.25
Leisa Fingar
11W–26L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Lisa Brechtel
4W–5L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Louann Kelly
12W–25L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Tina Reid
115W–62L 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.