Teams

JVarn (Palisades)

2025 Combo Doubles 18 & Over League · 18 & Over 9.5 Women - Mon PM

6 players · average NTRP 4.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-10-11vs DWest (Queens)Lost 02
L#1 DoublesTanya Hecht / Cecilia Drake vs Natalie Ivanov / Toni Laney1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesMAGDALENA STUDENOVSKY / Lina Clarke vs Meredith Propeck / Samantha Danesis6-7, 6-3, 0-1
2025-09-15vs DThayaprasat (Queens)Split 11
L#1 DoublesMAGDALENA STUDENOVSKY / Lina Clarke vs Laine Parker Horvath / Maggie Connolly7-6, 0-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesLindsay Morrison / Alison Lacy Sherrill vs Savanna Dumit / Mary-Margaret James6-3, 4-6, 1-0
2025-09-08vs DWest (Queens)Lost 02
L#1 DoublesLina Clarke / Tanya Hecht vs Kindell Schmitt / Diana West2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesCecilia Drake / Lindsay Morrison vs Hannah Chillag / Toni Laney0-6, 1-6
2025-08-25vs DThayaprasat (Queens)Lost 02
L#1 DoublesLina Clarke / MAGDALENA STUDENOVSKY vs Hannah English Rahill / Sanjana Sudhir3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesAlison Lacy Sherrill / Lindsay Morrison vs Caroline Frank / Cassandra Wincek3-6, 1-6
2025-08-18vs DWest (Queens)Lost 01
L#1 DoublesMAGDALENA STUDENOVSKY / Cecilia Drake vs Meghan Bartholomew / Samantha Danesis1-6, 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 18 & Over 9.5 Women - Mon PM 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 4.17 estimated across 5 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.

4.40
MAGDALENA STUDENOVSKY
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.30
Lina Clarke
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.20
Jessica Varn
published 4.5
4.07
Alison Lacy Sherrill
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.89
Cecilia Drake
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
Jordan Bowers
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.

Jessica Varn + Lina Clarke3355% games−1.2% vs expected
Lina Clarke + MAGDALENA STUDENOVSKY2546% gamesnot enough data
Alison Lacy Sherrill + Cecilia Drake134 matchesnot enough data
Alison Lacy Sherrill + Jessica Varn303 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.

4.5
MAGDALENA STUDENOVSKY
45W–31L career · type A · 4 lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
4.40
4.5
Lina Clarke
66W–47L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%91%8%
4.30
4.5
Jessica Varn
34W–23L career · no lines in 2025
7%91%2%
4.20
4.5
Alison Lacy Sherrill
33W–38L career · 2 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
4.07
4.5
Cecilia Drake
90W–51L career · 3 lines in 2025
79%21%<1%
3.89
Jordan Bowers
4W–5L career · no 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.