Teams

STL/Gregory/Hi-Tri

2025 Tri-Level 18 & Over · Women 4.0

16 players · average NTRP 4.57 / ST. LOUIS

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-07-29vs Mohrman/Hi-TriWon 21
W#1 DoublesErin Swaller / Sampada Coster vs Heather Brinkman / Alexis Woodman7-5, 6-1
L#2 DoublesErica Peterson / Aya Finley vs Dawn Woodman / Victoria Zielinski6-1, 0-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesWan-In Koo / Margaret Nosic vs Sarah Wedick / Wendy Yang7-6, 3-1
2025-07-26vs Mohrman/Hi-TriWon 30
W#1 DoublesJennifer Gadsky / Melissa Hoyos vs Jennifer Mckeown / Bekah Anderson7-5, 3-1
W#2 DoublesMeg Gregory / Severine Huchet vs Dawn Woodman / Brittany Mohrman6-0, 6-3
W#3 DoublesElisa Nunez / Susan Nunez vs Becky Hall / Wendy Yang6-1, 6-2
2025-07-22vs Mohrman/Hi-TriLost 02
L#1 DoublesJennifer Gadsky / Beatriz Juan Miranzo vs Bekah Anderson / Alexis Woodman3-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMeg Gregory / Emily Cimarolli vs Victoria Zielinski / Miranda Lopez6-4, 3-6, 0-1
2025-07-19vs Mohrman/Hi-TriWon 21
W#1 DoublesJennifer Gadsky / Melissa Hoyos vs Bekah Anderson / Jennifer Mckeown7-5, 3-1
W#2 DoublesMeg Gregory / Severine Huchet vs Brittany Mohrman / Dawn Woodman6-0, 6-3
L#3 DoublesMargaret Nosic / Wan-In Koo vs Sarah Wedick / Wendy Yang1-6, 7-6, 0-1
2025-07-01vs Mohrman/Hi-TriLost 12
W#1 DoublesErin Swaller / Beatriz Juan Miranzo vs Alexis Woodman / Heather Brinkman6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesEmily Cimarolli / Mila Bey vs Trinity Lopez / Dawn Woodman3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesCajal Sumino / Wan-In Koo vs Wendy Yang / Sarah Wedick5-7, 3-6
2025-06-28vs Mohrman/Hi-TriLost 02
L#2 DoublesEmily Cimarolli / Meg Gregory vs Brittany Mohrman / Trinity Lopez4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesWan-In Koo / Margaret Nosic vs Becky Hall / Sarah Wedick4-6, 1-6
2025-06-21vs Mohrman/Hi-TriWon 30
W#1 DoublesSampada Coster / Melissa Hoyos vs Heather Brinkman / Jennifer Mckeown5-7, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesSeverine Huchet / Erica Peterson vs Brittany Mohrman / Dawn Woodman2-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSusan Nunez / Elisa Nunez vs Wendy Yang / Becky Hall6-4, 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 Women 4.0 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 4.13 estimated across 10 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.

Beatriz Juan Miranzo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
Erin Swaller
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.47
Aya Finley
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.38
Mila Bey
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
4.32
Elisa Nunez
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.29
Meg Gregory
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
4.26
Emily Cimarolli
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.26
Severine Huchet
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
4.20
Erica Peterson
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.86
Susan Nunez
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Cajal Sumino
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.67
Margaret Nosic
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.62
Wan-In Koo
usually #2 Doubles 56%, also #3 Doubles 44% · published
Jennifer Gadsky
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Melissa Hoyos
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Sampada Coster
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 Gregory + Susan Nunez16267% games+12.2% vs expected
Severine Huchet + Meg Gregory612461% games+7.1% vs expected
Meg Gregory + Erica Peterson5355% games+0.1% vs expected
Erica Peterson + Susan Nunez51143% games−7.8% vs expected
Severine Huchet + Erica Peterson4250% games−13.9% vs expected
Margaret Nosic + Wan-In Koo123 matchesnot enough data
Elisa Nunez + Susan Nunez303 matchesnot enough data
Wan-In Koo + Susan Nunez123 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
Beatriz Juan Miranzo
1W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
5
Erin Swaller
3W–2L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
4.5
Aya Finley
34W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%59%41%
4.47
Mila Bey
24W–17L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
4.38
4.5
Elisa Nunez
21W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%91%8%
4.32
Meg Gregory
131W–63L career · 8 lines in 2025
1%93%5%
4.29
4.5
Emily Cimarolli
118W–61L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
4.26
Severine Huchet
179W–68L career · 7 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
4.26
4.5
Erica Peterson
89W–42L career · 3 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
4.20
Susan Nunez
192W–95L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%86%14%
3.86
4
Cajal Sumino
59W–57L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Margaret Nosic
63W–90L career · 3 lines in 2025
10%90%1%
3.67
Wan-In Koo
213W–161L career · 9 lines in 2025
18%82%<1%
3.62
Jennifer Gadsky
7W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Melissa Hoyos
8W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Sampada Coster
15W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
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.