Teams

NJ NAVY

2024 CTA WOMEN'S SUMMER DAYTIME - DEN · WOMEN 4.0 - SUMMER DAYTIME

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 →
Schedule6 played
2024-08-01vs LPTC NAVYWon 20
W#1 DoublesCharlene Bailey / Sheri Wright vs Bobbie Lutz / Fenny Evers6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJill Mendoza / Ann Stafford vs Holly Harrison / Tamra Scaturro7-5, 6-4
2024-07-25vs NJ TEALWon 10
W#1 DoublesCharlene Bailey / Leslie Haines vs Julie Lochner / Jessica Mitchell6-2, 0-6, 1-0
2024-07-18vs HIW ORANGEWon 10
W#1 SinglesJill Mendoza vs Cindy Middleton6-3, 6-4
2024-07-15vs MC NAVYLost 01
L#1 SinglesJill Mendoza vs Cameron Passmore3-6, 1-6
2024-07-11vs BM YELLOWSplit 11
W#1 DoublesCharlene Bailey / Darcie Coy vs Jenny Kelly / Aree Bly6-4, 7-5
L#2 DoublesJill Mendoza / Lisa Mountain vs Deanna Deorio / Julie Pontiff6-7, 2-6
2024-06-27vs LPTC NAVYWon 20
W#1 DoublesCharlene Bailey / Sheri Wright vs Taylor Carney / Karan Tierney6-4, 6-4
W#1 SinglesJill Mendoza vs Stacy Robins6-4, 6-2
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 - SUMMER DAYTIME 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 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.

3.87
Charlene Bailey
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.84
Jill Mendoza
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.84
Darcie Coy
published 4
3.83
Sheri Wright
published
3.55
Ann Stafford
published 4
3.50
Lisa Mountain
published
3.47
Leslie Haines
published
3.37
Nikole Randolph
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.

Darcie Coy + Sheri Wright6753% games+2.2% vs expected
Sandra Lucero Jacquez + Sheri Wright044 matchesnot enough data
Ann Stafford + Darcie Coy213 matchesnot enough data
Charlene Bailey + Sandra Lucero Jacquez033 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
Charlene Bailey
129W–101L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%82%17%
3.87
4
Jill Mendoza
94W–57L career · 5 lines in 2024
1%86%13%
3.84
4
Darcie Coy
85W–59L career · no lines in 2024
1%87%13%
3.84
Sheri Wright
14W–15L career · no lines in 2024
1%88%11%
3.83
4
Ann Stafford
12W–19L career · no lines in 2024
35%65%<1%
3.55
Lisa Mountain
9W–6L career · no lines in 2024
51%49%<1%
3.50
Leslie Haines
8W–22L career · no lines in 2024
59%41%<1%
3.47
3.5
Sandra Lucero Jacquez
27W–39L career · no lines in 2024
<1%82%17%
3.37
Nikole Randolph
0W–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.