Teams

Team 6 Overserved

2022 NOVA Adult 40 & Over Winter · NOVA Adult 40 & Over 4.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 4.40 / VIRGINIA

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 →
Schedule5 played
2022-04-09Won 20
W#1 SinglesAnne Jagodits vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesDebbie Boger / Debbie Cafferty vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-03-06Split 11
W#1 DoublesDava Baumann / Danielle Desfosses vs Rina Gamarra / Karen McAndrews6-4, 6-2
L#1 SinglesFelicia Harrison vs Malini Sekhar2-6, 1-5
2022-01-30vs Team 7 Set to WinWon 21
W#1 DoublesDava Baumann / Danielle Desfosses vs Blair Reid / Colleen Stoltz6-2, 6-0
W#1 SinglesFelicia Harrison vs Dana Chladek6-4, 2-2
L#2 DoublesMary Ann Wagner / Debbie Cafferty vs Kerrie Jenkins / Stacy Stratton6-7, 2-5
2022-01-22Won 10
W#1 SinglesAnne Jagodits vs Rina Gamarra6-2, 6-0
2022-01-09vs Team 3 MoconovaLost 01
L#1 SinglesFelicia Harrison vs Lily Kosegarten1-6, 2-6
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 NOVA Adult 40 & Over 4.5 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 4.11 estimated across 9 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.

4.46
Danielle Desfosses
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.32
Dava Baumann
published 4.5
4.26
Kathryn Rigney
published
4.23
Anne Jagodits
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4.5
4.16
Loretta Sevier
published
4.15
Mary Ann Wagner
published
4.10
Jennifer Collier
published
3.85
Felicia Harrison
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.44
Debbie Cafferty
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
Laura Smith
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.

Dava Baumann + Danielle Desfosses224 matchesnot enough data
Anne Jagodits + Felicia Harrison123 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.

5
Danielle Desfosses
131W–61L career · 2 lines in 2022
61%39%<1%
4.46
4.5
Dava Baumann
33W–25L career · type A · no lines in 2022
1%91%8%
4.32
Kathryn Rigney
8W–10L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%3%
4.26
4.5
Anne Jagodits
208W–213L career · 2 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
4.23
Loretta Sevier
20W–10L career · no lines in 2022
12%88%<1%
4.16
Mary Ann Wagner
15W–14L career · no lines in 2022
12%87%<1%
4.15
Jennifer Collier
10W–4L career · no lines in 2022
21%78%<1%
4.10
4
Felicia Harrison
87W–105L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%86%13%
3.85
4
Debbie Cafferty
17W–41L career · 2 lines in 2022
67%33%<1%
3.44
Laura Smith
1W–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.