Teams

RMTC NAVY

2024 TRIO - DEN · WOMEN 4.0 - TRIO

9 players · average NTRP 3.90 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule4 played
2024-04-27vs MEA GREENWon 20
W#1 DoublesPauline Lahey / Catriona Murray vs Hilary Wallace / Sara Oclassen6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCara Hoving / Heather Smith vs Mary Jensen / Patricia Jamison6-1, 4-6, 1-0
2024-04-20vs NJ YELLOWSplit 11
L#1 DoublesChelsea Sump / Catriona Murray vs Kirstin Kraig / Anne Steputis2-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesCara Hoving vs Hilary Navy6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2024-04-13vs LTA-Q REDLost 01
L#1 DoublesHeather Smith / Cara Hoving vs Annie Richardson / Tracey Graham2-6, 6-2, 0-1
2024-04-06vs BTA-C GREENLost 01
L#2 DoublesHeather Smith / Cara Hoving vs Laura Nagel / Janphen Jaktupat2-6, 5-7
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 - TRIO 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 3.66 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.

3.93
Cara Hoving
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.79
Jennifer Ufland
published 4
3.79
Pauline Lahey
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.78
Heather Smith
published
3.71
Chelsea Sump
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.43
Catriona Murray
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.21
Ruth Weinberg
published
Jill Oliver
published
Julie Simmonds
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.

Pauline Lahey + Cara Hoving14266% games+5.5% vs expected
Pauline Lahey + Jennifer Ufland4156% gamesnot enough data
Pauline Lahey + Chelsea Sump2349% gamesnot enough data
Jennifer Ufland + Chelsea Sump2348% gamesnot enough data
Pauline Lahey + Catriona Murray123 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
Cara Hoving
72W–34L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%70%30%
3.93
4
Jennifer Ufland
70W–62L career · no lines in 2024
2%91%7%
3.79
4
Pauline Lahey
59W–44L career · 1 line in 2024
2%91%7%
3.79
Heather Smith
13W–26L career · no lines in 2024
2%92%5%
3.78
4
Chelsea Sump
34W–46L career · 1 line in 2024
7%91%2%
3.71
3.5
Catriona Murray
5W–14L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%70%30%
3.43
Ruth Weinberg
11W–10L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
3.21
Jill Oliver
0W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Julie Simmonds
1W–3L career · no lines in 2024
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.