Teams

Team 3 RJ Net Assets

2022 NOVA Adult 40 & Over Winter · NOVA Adult 40 & Over 3.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / 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 →
Schedule7 played
2022-03-30vs Team 4 Sassy SmashersWon 10
W#1 DoublesMiriam Smolen / Rachel Kim vs Zoe Huang / Laura McNicholl6-4, 6-1
2022-03-25vs Team 5Won 10
W#2 DoublesGenevieve Raphael / Lena Ferris vs Stephanie Fultz / Anne Gauthier6-1, 6-4
2022-03-20vs Team 8 Sassy StringsLost 01
L#2 DoublesCarol Malackowski / Lena Ferris vs Celeste Linthicum / Patricia Hathaway6-7, 1-3
2022-03-15vs Team 9Won 10
W#2 DoublesLena Ferris / Genevieve Raphael vs Alexandra Braun / Shannon Powell6-0, 6-1
2022-02-22vs Team 1 Tamara’s Slice GirlsLost 01
L#2 DoublesGenevieve Raphael / Miriam Smolen vs Allison Erdle / Cassie Pickard1-6, 2-6
2022-02-09vs Team 7 VolleyVixensLost 01
L#1 DoublesSheryl Morley / Lena Ferris vs Sara Franklin / Lena Luo2-6, 3-6
2022-01-22vs Team 11 String CourtettesLost 01
L#2 DoublesCarol Malackowski / Miriam Smolen vs Jenny Gillespie / Jean Prince3-6, 0-6
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 3.0 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 2.69 estimated across 8 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.

2.93
Rachel Kim
published
2.87
Anna Monaghan
published 3
2.76
Lynne Aoyama
published
2.73
Jennifer Kroll
published
2.69
KERSTIN DEMKO
published
2.68
Lena Ferris
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.45
Miriam Smolen
usually #1 Doubles 78%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published 3
2.43
Karen Boulineaux
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.

Miriam Smolen + Lena Ferris3538% gamesnot enough data
KERSTIN DEMKO + Jennifer Kroll134 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.

Rachel Kim
9W–11L career · no lines in 2022
<1%69%31%
2.93
3
Anna Monaghan
4W–1L career · no lines in 2022
<1%84%16%
2.87
Lynne Aoyama
63W–54L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%3%
2.76
3
Genevieve Raphael
0W–3L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Jennifer Kroll
12W–14L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.73
KERSTIN DEMKO
4W–6L career · no lines in 2022
8%92%1%
2.69
3
Lena Ferris
35W–47L career · 4 lines in 2022
9%91%1%
2.68
3
Miriam Smolen
49W–101L career · 9 lines in 2022
66%34%<1%
2.45
Karen Boulineaux
0W–4L career · no lines in 2022
69%31%<1%
2.43

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.