Teams

BSF:Double vision: Bratz/Hogan

2022-23 NCT Tri Level Women · 4.0 Women

4 players · average NTRP / NORTHERN CONNECTICUT

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 →
Schedule7 played
2022-12-08vs GTC:Not My Fault:Eller/McAuliffeLost 01
L#1 DoublesKatarzyna Bratz / Louisa Hogan vs Karen Eller / Suzanne Mc Auliffe4-6, 3-6
2022-12-04vs MRC:ZoldyLost 01
L#1 DoublesMary Kate Higham / Sarah Stapleton vs Jackie Zoldy / Liz Cummings1-6, 4-6
W#1 DoublesMary Kate Higham / Sarah Stapleton vs Stacey Weinstein / Katharine Miller3-6, 7-5, 1-0
2022-11-18vs SIMS:Kaplan/CollinsLost 01
L#1 DoublesMary Kate Higham / Sarah Stapleton vs Alessandra Veronesi / Leah Black2-6, 2-6
2022-11-14vs FV:Level Up:Goodwin/KingLost 01
L#1 DoublesKatarzyna Bratz / Louisa Hogan vs Jennifer King / Sheri Eklund0-6, 4-6
2022-10-21vs FV:Queens of the Court:SansoneLost 01
L#1 DoublesKatarzyna Bratz / Louisa Hogan vs Esther Aronson / Rebecca Fishman3-6, 3-6
2022-10-02vs BTC:Serves you Right:JeppsonLost 01
L#1 DoublesKatarzyna Bratz / Louisa Hogan vs Nora Hannigan / Celine Mende0-6, 1-6
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 standings15 teams · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1BTC:Serves you Right:Jeppson7070025
2BTC:Bloom Duo:Song/Moundraty6060242
3FV:Fisher/Chaho5252562
4SIMS:Kaplan/Collins4242648
5EHTC:Net Benders:Yazon/Mills4343665
6FV:Queens of the Court:Sansone4343765
7FV:Level Up:Goodwin/King4343766
8MRC:Luv Wins:Palanzo3333959
9MRC:Zoldy3434863
10GTC:Double Trouble:Weinstein/Miller2424868
11BSF:Bowers2424960
12SIMS:Chapel24241069
13GTC:Double Newbies:Siracusa/Prince25251176
14FV:Ace Kickers:McCormick/Harris25251179
15BSF:Double vision: Bratz/Hogan16161383

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 3.52 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.

3.62
Mary Kate Higham
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.53
Katarzyna Bratz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.40
Louisa Hogan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Sarah Stapleton
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.

Louisa Hogan + Katarzyna Bratz6944% games+0.2% vs expected
Sarah Stapleton + Mary Kate Higham123 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.

Mary Kate Higham
35W–30L career · 3 lines in 2023
20%79%<1%
3.62
Katarzyna Bratz
96W–81L career · 4 lines in 2023
42%58%<1%
3.53
Louisa Hogan
199W–194L career · 8 lines in 2023
<1%76%24%
3.40
Sarah Stapleton
120W–62L career · 3 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.