Memorial B2 | Division Standings

Memorial B2 Division Standings

Fall 2026 · 10 teams

Results through Oct 29

The race right now

The gap is down to 6 points after second place gained 1 this round. More

Rank	Team	PTSLines won	Lines W-L	Games won %	Roster Depth Index	Last 5
#1	Nottingham Forest No Faults34-14 lines · 57.5% L5 +4+6+4+4+4	34+4	34-1470.8%	57.5%445-329 games	69.3#1	L5 +4+6+4+4+4
Nottingham Forest No Faults · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 78.6% · Lines 4–5: 57.1% · Weakest Line: Line 4 (57.1%)8 recorded team matches · 0 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 16-275.0%79-64 games · +15 diff. Line 25-183.3%61-42 games · +19 diff. Line 38-0100.0%88-25 games · +63 diff. Line 44-357.1%58-56 games · +2 diff. Line 54-357.1%72-54 games · +18 diff. Top lower-line contributorsDiane FishmanCC · 4-3 on Lines 4–5Jennifer BradshawC · 3-3 on Lines 4–5Shelia Jones · 3-2 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.
#2↑ 3	MFC Cross Court Crushers28-14 lines · 57.2% L5 +5+5+2+4+5	28+5	28-1466.7%	57.2%360-269 games	58.2#3	L5 +5+5+2+4+5
MFC Cross Court Crushers · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 61.5% · Lines 4–5: 64.3% · Weakest Line: Line 5 (42.9%)7 recorded team matches · 6 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 14-357.1%58-55 games · +3 diff. Line 24-266.7%54-40 games · +14 diff. Line 35-271.4%67-44 games · +23 diff. Line 46-185.7%77-41 games · +36 diff. Line 53-442.9%51-61 games · -10 diff. Top lower-line contributorsEllen Halper · 6-1 on Lines 4–5Allison HopkinsSubstitute · 4-0 on Lines 4–5Andrea Eubanks · 3-3 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.
#3	HRC Make it a Double28-20 lines · 52.6% L5 +3+3+4+4+3	28+3	28-2058.3%	52.6%410-369 games	46.5#4	L5 +3+3+4+4+3
HRC Make it a Double · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 38.5% · Lines 4–5: 87.5% · Weakest Line: Line 3 (25.0%)8 recorded team matches · 6 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 13-350.0%58-50 games · +8 diff. Line 22-528.6%38-67 games · -29 diff. Line 32-625.0%52-85 games · -33 diff. Line 46-275.0%78-76 games · +2 diff. Line 58-0100.0%88-38 games · +50 diff. Top lower-line contributorsTrisha Moore · 7-0 on Lines 4–5Taryn Mitchan · 7-0 on Lines 4–5Neda Axelrod · 6-1 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.
#4↓ 2	LCC Party at the Net27-21 lines · 52.9% L5 +3+3+4+3+2	27+2	27-2156.3%	52.9%435-388 games	44.3#5	L5 +3+3+4+3+2
LCC Party at the Net · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 62.5% · Lines 4–5: 37.5% · Weakest Line: Line 4 (25.0%)8 recorded team matches · 7 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 14-450.0%72-68 games · +4 diff. Line 26-275.0%82-61 games · +21 diff. Line 35-362.5%69-59 games · +10 diff. Line 42-625.0%62-75 games · -13 diff. Line 54-450.0%67-64 games · +3 diff. Top lower-line contributorsCimarron Evans · 3-4 on Lines 4–5Allison CarlCC · 3-3 on Lines 4–5Elissa LorenzenSubstituteSubstitute · 2-1 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.
#5↓ 1	Lakeside Serve em Up26-22 lines · 50.3% L5 +3+3+5+2+2	26+2	26-2254.2%	50.3%385-381 games	58.5#2	L5 +3+3+5+2+2
Lakeside Serve em Up · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 78.6% · Lines 4–5: 53.3% · Weakest Line: Line 4 (37.5%)8 recorded team matches · 8 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 17-0100.0%77-31 games · +46 diff. Line 24-357.1%67-53 games · +14 diff. Line 35-271.4%66-51 games · +15 diff. Line 43-537.5%67-83 games · -16 diff. Line 55-271.4%64-55 games · +9 diff. Top lower-line contributorsAnn Kampschmidt · 3-1 on Lines 4–5Terri Tarwater · 2-5 on Lines 4–5Mickie StraitC · 2-5 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.
#6	Forest Club Simply-Smashing22-26 lines · 47.9% L5 +2+1+3+3+4	22+4	22-2645.8%	47.9%380-413 games	41.5#7	L5 +2+1+3+3+4
Forest Club Simply-Smashing · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 28.6% · Lines 4–5: 80.0% · Weakest Line: Line 3 (25.0%)8 recorded team matches · 12 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 12-528.6%50-64 games · -14 diff. Line 22-528.6%50-68 games · -18 diff. Line 32-625.0%59-86 games · -27 diff. Line 46-275.0%79-56 games · +23 diff. Line 56-185.7%70-45 games · +25 diff. Top lower-line contributorsAmanda HansenCC · 5-1 on Lines 4–5Katie Danysh · 5-1 on Lines 4–5Belinda Young · 4-2 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.
#7	Houstonian Serve Aces20-22 lines · 51.5% L5 0+4+2+4+3	20+3	20-2247.6%	51.5%389-366 games	41.9#6	L5 0+4+2+4+3
Houstonian Serve Aces · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 35.7% · Lines 4–5: 58.3% · Weakest Line: Line 2 (28.6%)7 recorded team matches · 14 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 13-442.9%66-73 games · -7 diff. Line 22-528.6%71-72 games · -1 diff. Line 33-350.0%57-50 games · +7 diff. Line 45-183.3%62-34 games · +28 diff. Line 52-433.3%42-49 games · -7 diff. Top lower-line contributorsAmber Hodgkiss · 4-0 on Lines 4–5Jennifer Langford Bosch · 2-4 on Lines 4–5Helen BaakliniSubstitute · 2-1 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.
#8	Houston Racquet Club Red20-28 lines · 44.6% L5 +5+3+1+2+3	20+3	20-2841.7%	44.6%339-421 games	18.0#10	L5 +5+3+1+2+3
Houston Racquet Club Red · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 7.7% · Lines 4–5: 26.7% · Weakest Line: Line 1 (0.0%)8 recorded team matches · 14 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 10-50.0%22-55 games · -33 diff. Line 21-712.5%47-83 games · -36 diff. Line 35-362.5%72-62 games · +10 diff. Line 42-528.6%52-73 games · -21 diff. Line 52-625.0%58-82 games · -24 diff. Top lower-line contributorsKatherine Richards · 2-4 on Lines 4–5Andrea Walsh · 2-3 on Lines 4–5Paula Cutts · 2-3 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.
#9	Twin Lakes Supreme Court17-31 lines · 43.7% L5 +30+2+2+3	17+3	17-3135.4%	43.7%329-424 games	29.1#8	L5 +30+2+2+3
Twin Lakes Supreme Court · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 71.4% · Lines 4–5: 12.5% · Weakest Line: Line 4 (12.5%)8 recorded team matches · 17 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 14-266.7%55-39 games · +16 diff. Line 26-275.0%74-63 games · +11 diff. Line 31-614.3%37-74 games · -37 diff. Line 41-712.5%54-86 games · -32 diff. Line 51-712.5%44-85 games · -41 diff. Top lower-line contributorsShirley Beasley · 1-7 on Lines 4–5Suzanne Leonardi-CattolicaC · 1-5 on Lines 4–5Bethany Dickinson · 1-3 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.
#10	Wilchester Spin Sisters12-36 lines · 42.8% L5 +1+2+3+2+1	12+1	12-3625.0%	42.8%335-447 games	22.8#9	L5 +1+2+3+2+1
Wilchester Spin Sisters · Roster Depth IndexLines 1–2: 30.8% · Lines 4–5: 26.7% · Weakest Line: Line 1 (14.3%)8 recorded team matches · 22 points behind the reported leaderOpen team clubhouse Line 11-614.3%39-77 games · -38 diff. Line 23-350.0%59-54 games · +5 diff. Line 31-614.3%42-73 games · -31 diff. Line 42-528.6%58-67 games · -9 diff. Line 52-625.0%59-82 games · -23 diff. Top lower-line contributorsLeslie Pine · 2-5 on Lines 4–5Heather Willard · 2-4 on Lines 4–5Wendy McWilliams · 2-4 on Lines 4–5 The Roster Depth Index rewards wins across the lineup, with extra attention to the weakest line. Higher is better. All five lines need results; defaults and missing scores are excluded.

Matches to watch

All team matches →

Nov 5

Nottingham Forest No FaultsvsLakeside Serve em Up

No. 1 meets No. 5, separated by 8 points.

Watch: Away: Line 1 is 7-1 this season. Home: Line 1 is 6-2 across 8 recorded results.

Nov 5

Houstonian Serve AcesvsHouston Racquet Club Red

No. 7 meets No. 8, separated by 0 points. Winning 4 of 6 lines would break the points tie, with other totals unchanged.

Watch: Away: Line 6 is 6-2 this season. Home: Line 6 is 3-4 across 7 recorded results.

Nov 5

Twin Lakes Supreme CourtvsWilchester Spin Sisters

No. 9 meets No. 10, separated by 5 points. Winning 6 of 6 lines would put the trailing team ahead on points, with other totals unchanged.

Watch: Away: Line 6 is 3-4 this season. Home: Line 6 is 2-6 across 8 recorded results.

Based on the retained schedule and reported standings. Outstanding results can change the gaps.

What would this score change?

Try a line score for one upcoming team match. All other teams keep their currently reported points.

Team matchNottingham Forest No Faults lines won

Nottingham Forest No Faults 3, Lakeside Serve em Up 3.

Team	Reported points	Added	Hypothetical total
Nottingham Forest No Faults	34	+3	37
Lakeside Serve em Up	26	+3	29
HRC Make it a Double	28	+0	28
MFC Cross Court Crushers	28	+0	28
LCC Party at the Net	27	+0	27
Forest Club Simply-Smashing	22	+0	22
Houston Racquet Club Red	20	+0	20
Houstonian Serve Aces	20	+0	20
Twin Lakes Supreme Court	17	+0	17
Wilchester Spin Sisters	12	+0	12

An illustration using one point per line, without defaults, adjustments or results from other matches. Ordered by points only; official tiebreaks and qualification rules are not applied. This does not change recorded results.

Weekly Match Highlights

Oct 29

Biggest Upset

Line 2

Oct 29Line 2

Lakeside Serve em Up

Kate Schneider

1210 Elo

Erin Land

1208 Elo

6 - 11

Pro Set · Target 11

Forest Club Simply-SmashingUPSET WIN

Jena Clark

1173 Elo

Allison Coleman

1165 Elo

Match context for Lakeside Serve em Up and Forest Club Simply-Smashing
Lakeside Serve em Up	Metric	Forest Club Simply-Smashing
56%	Pre-match win chance	44%
-20	Pair rating change	+20

Rating details

Match context for Lakeside Serve em Up and Forest Club Simply-Smashing
Lakeside Serve em Up	Metric	Forest Club Simply-Smashing
	Pair Elo before
	Pair Elo after

Pair ratings add both players’ ratings together. Pair rating change is their combined change, not each player’s individual change.

One of 4 points taken in this team match.

View all upset wins →View match

Pro-Set Shutout / Rout

Line 3

Oct 29Line 3

Nottingham Forest No FaultsWIN

Judy Azzo

1255 Elo

Kelly Munsell

1255 Elo

11 - 1

Pro Set · Target 11

LCC Party at the Net

Tanya Smalling

1235 Elo

Laura Horn

1235 Elo

Match context for Nottingham Forest No Faults and LCC Party at the Net
Nottingham Forest No Faults	Metric	LCC Party at the Net
53%	Pre-match win chance	47%
+19	Pair rating change	-19

Rating details

Match context for Nottingham Forest No Faults and LCC Party at the Net
Nottingham Forest No Faults	Metric	LCC Party at the Net
	Pair Elo before
	Pair Elo after

Pair ratings add both players’ ratings together. Pair rating change is their combined change, not each player’s individual change.

One of 4 points taken in this team match. In the reported standings, 6 points separate the top two teams.

View match

Closest Contest

Line 6

Oct 29Line 6

Nottingham Forest No FaultsUPSET WIN

Caitlin Palmer

1206 Elo

Dinah Bray

1219 Elo

11 - 11

Pro Set · Target 11

LCC Party at the Net

Ginny Keyser

1225 Elo

Kati Thompson

1228 Elo

Match context for Nottingham Forest No Faults and LCC Party at the Net
Nottingham Forest No Faults	Metric	LCC Party at the Net
48%	Pre-match win chance	52%
+17	Pair rating change	-17

Rating details

Match context for Nottingham Forest No Faults and LCC Party at the Net
Nottingham Forest No Faults	Metric	LCC Party at the Net
	Pair Elo before
	Pair Elo after

Pair ratings add both players’ ratings together. Pair rating change is their combined change, not each player’s individual change.

One of 4 points taken in this team match. In the reported standings, 6 points separate the top two teams.

View match

Biggest Elo Lift

Line 1

Oct 29Line 1

Nottingham Forest No Faults

Lorraine Alvey

1236 Elo

Jamie Hall

1227 Elo

7 - 11

Pro Set · Target 11

LCC Party at the NetUPSET WIN

Leah Gibson

1209 Elo

Tracy McMullen

1181 Elo

Match context for Nottingham Forest No Faults and LCC Party at the Net
Nottingham Forest No Faults	Metric	LCC Party at the Net
55%	Pre-match win chance	45%
-20	Pair rating change	+20

Rating details

Match context for Nottingham Forest No Faults and LCC Party at the Net
Nottingham Forest No Faults	Metric	LCC Party at the Net
	Pair Elo before
	Pair Elo after

Pair ratings add both players’ ratings together. Pair rating change is their combined change, not each player’s individual change.

One of 2 points taken in this team match.

View match

Team Line Performance

Win %

All 10 league teams · Line-by-line results

Team	Line 1	Line 2	Line 3	Line 4	Line 5	Line 6
Nottingham Forest No Faults	75%6-2	83%5-1	100%8-0	57%4-3	57%4-3	50%4-4
MFC Cross Court Crushers	57%4-3	67%4-2	71%5-2	86%6-1	43%3-4	75%3-1
HRC Make it a Double	50%3-3	29%2-5	25%2-6	75%6-2	100%8-0	75%6-2
LCC Party at the Net	50%4-4	75%6-2	63%5-3	25%2-6	50%4-4	75%6-2
Lakeside Serve em Up	100%7-0	57%4-3	71%5-2	38%3-5	71%5-2	0%0-5
Forest Club Simply-Smashing	29%2-5	29%2-5	25%2-6	75%6-2	86%6-1	38%3-5
Houstonian Serve Aces	43%3-4	29%2-5	50%3-3	83%5-1	33%2-4	43%3-4
Houston Racquet Club Red	0%0-5	13%1-7	63%5-3	29%2-5	25%2-6	86%6-1
Twin Lakes Supreme Court	67%4-2	75%6-2	14%1-6	13%1-7	13%1-7	14%1-6
Wilchester Spin Sisters	14%1-6	50%3-3	14%1-6	29%2-5	25%2-6	33%2-4

Above 50%At 50%Below 50%

Line Strength

Loads as you scroll, or open it now.