Teams

RFC:TBD:Pickering

2021 ME Tri Level · Women 3.5

5 players · average NTRP / MAINE

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2021-11-13vs RFC:TBD:GreenWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Eberhardt / Therese Drapeau vs Danielle Dignan / Kristie Green6-3, 6-1
2021-11-13vs WOOD:WoodlandsRacqueteers:FendlerWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Eberhardt / Therese Drapeau vs Christine Chasse / Heidi Allen6-3, 7-5
2021-10-31vs RFC:TBD:GreenWon 10
W#1 DoublesMartha Elbaum / Stephanie Glanville vs Eliza Chappell / Kristie Green6-0, 6-2
2021-10-30vs RFC:TBD:GreenWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Eberhardt / Meg Pickering vs Kristie Green / Kimberly Kelly-Brewster6-1, 7-6
2021-10-30vs RFC:TBD:MagantiWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Eberhardt / Therese Drapeau vs Marlena Lantos / Agathi Haxhi6-2, 6-1
2021-10-16vs RFC:TBD:MagantiWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Eberhardt / Therese Drapeau vs Claudia Marroquin / Marlena Lantos6-1, 6-1
2021-10-03vs RFC:TBD:MagantiWon 10
W#1 DoublesMartha Elbaum / Stephanie Glanville vs Agathi Haxhi / Valentina Kapothanasis7-5, 6-1
2021-10-02vs WOOD:WoodlandsRacqueteers:FendlerWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Eberhardt / Meg Pickering vs Christine Chasse / Regina Yoon6-3, 7-6
2021-09-18vs WOOD:WoodlandsRacqueteers:FendlerWon 10
W#1 DoublesMartha Elbaum / Stephanie Glanville vs Christine Chasse / Karen Fendler6-3, 6-2
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 standings2 teams · Women 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1RFC:TBD:Graceffa5151242
2RFC:TBD:Pickering3333762

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.56 estimated across 3 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.

3.70
Therese Drapeau
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.57
Martha Elbaum
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.40
Karen Eberhardt
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Meg Pickering
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Stephanie Glanville
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Meg Pickering + Karen Eberhardt8070% games+7.6% vs expected
Therese Drapeau + Karen Eberhardt131153% games+4.6% vs expected
Martha Elbaum + Stephanie Glanville13363% games+3.2% vs expected
Martha Elbaum + Meg Pickering432357% games+1.5% vs expected
Martha Elbaum + Karen Eberhardt4162% games−0.9% vs expected
Meg Pickering + Stephanie Glanville5163% games−3.7% vs expected
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.

Therese Drapeau
54W–35L career · 4 lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.70
Martha Elbaum
152W–81L career · 3 lines in 2022
29%71%<1%
3.57
Karen Eberhardt
190W–107L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%78%22%
3.40
Meg Pickering
90W–53L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Stephanie Glanville
64W–26L career · 3 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.