Teams

Indy C 5.5W IRCD Carlson

Fall USTA Central Indiana Combo Adult · CIN Indianapolis Combo 5.5 Women, F

10 players · average NTRP 3.00 / CENTRAL INDIANA

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 →
Flight standings8 teams · CIN Indianapolis Combo 5.5 Women, F
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Indy C 5.5W IND Carnes000000
2Indy C 5.5W IRCD Carlson000000
3Indy C 5.5W CRC Meyer000000
4Indy C 5.5W CRC Goelz000000
5Indy C 5.5W IRCD Taylor000000
6Indy C 5.5W IRCD Holden000000
7Indy C 5.5W JCC Valentine000000
8Indy C 5.5W WIRC Bourquin000000

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 2.64 estimated across 7 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.

2.94
Katie Katris
published
2.80
Julie Calvert
published
2.77
Andrea Turner
published 3
Ashley Welch
published 3
2.55
Viviane Williams
published
2.52
Tomo Shimano
published
2.52
Heather Karazim
published
2.36
Laura Critchlow
published
Morgan Polizzi
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.

Viviane Williams + Tomo Shimano3261% gamesnot enough data
Morgan Polizzi + Katie Katris303 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.

Katie Katris
22W–6L career · no lines in 2026
<1%66%34%
2.94
Julie Calvert
20W–11L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%8%
2.80
3
Amy Groswald Hess
23W–10L career · no lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.77
3
Andrea Turner
4W–2L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
3
Ashley Welch
2W–1L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Viviane Williams
25W–30L career · no lines in 2026
0%37%63%
2.55
Tomo Shimano
21W–11L career · no lines in 2026
0%45%55%
2.52
Heather Karazim
6W–2L career · no lines in 2026
46%54%<1%
2.52
Laura Critchlow
24W–33L career · no lines in 2026
0%84%16%
2.36
Morgan Polizzi
10W–4L career · no lines in 2026
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.