Teams

Low Tri W MRC Kubek

Late Summer USTA Central Indiana Tri-Level · CIN Indy Women's Tri-Level 3.0

9 players · average NTRP 3.38 / 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 →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-20vs Low Tri W IRCD AndersenLost 12
L#1 DoublesMarianne Vorhees / Molly Crabtree vs Kimberly Andersen / Ashley DeMello1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCallie Conatser / Choey Kubek vs Megan Talpas / Laura Slowikowski4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesTina Zhang / Kenna Jones vs Kari Huddleston / Katherine Goth6-2, 6-4
2026-08-13vs Low Tri W IRCD GuptaLost 12
W#1 DoublesJini Morgan / Molly Crabtree vs Julie Burns / Tracy Miller6-4, 6-0
L#2 DoublesChoey Kubek / Callie Conatser vs Jill Chlystun / Yating Jiang1-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesTina Zhang / Anne Nevitt vs Tabatha MacKison / Julie McCall6-4, 2-6, 0-1
2026-08-06vs Low Tri W IRCD AkersWon 20
W#1 DoublesTeresa Keller / Marianne Vorhees vs Megan Fernandez / Angela Davis6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesNatalie Robbins / Andrea Eads vs Susan Akers / Dahnya Chop6-1, 6-7, 1-0
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 standings6 teams · CIN Indy Women's Tri-Level 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Low Tri W IRCD Pruitt2060132
2Low Tri W IRCD Andersen2042550
3Low Tri W MRC Kubek1133753
4Low Tri W IRCD Gupta1133754
5Low Tri W IRCD Akers02151061
6Low Tri W IRCD Trotter02151069

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 3.19 estimated across 9 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.

3.51
Teresa Keller
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.49
Callie Conatser
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.40
Choey Kubek
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.25
Marianne Vorhees
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.19
Molly Crabtree
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.12
Andrea Eads
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.05
Natalie Robbins
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.87
Anne Nevitt
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.83
Tina Zhang
usually #3 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.

Anne Nevitt + Natalie Robbins181057% games+7.3% vs expected
Marianne Vorhees + Teresa Keller9066% gamesnot enough data
Choey Kubek + Callie Conatser224 matchesnot enough data
Anne Nevitt + Callie Conatser303 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.

Teresa Keller
166W–49L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.51
3.5
Callie Conatser
34W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%53%47%
3.49
3.5
Choey Kubek
57W–45L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%76%24%
3.40
Marianne Vorhees
158W–120L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%4%96%
3.25
Molly Crabtree
18W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%9%91%
3.19
3.5
Andrea Eads
20W–15L career · 1 line in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.12
Natalie Robbins
37W–23L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%37%63%
3.05
3
Anne Nevitt
56W–38L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%82%18%
2.87
Tina Zhang
6W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%88%11%
2.83

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.