Teams

A18 4.0W MV2 Zhang

2025 NEOTA Adult 18 & Over Summer · NEOTA A18&O 4.0 Women Summer

15 players · average NTRP 3.75 / NORTHEASTERN OHIO

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
2025-07-15vs NEO/White/A18/4.0WLost 23
L#1 DoublesKristin Chuko / Carolann Sterkenburg vs Michelle Simmons / Ally Murphy1-6, 4-6
W#1 SinglesChelsea Rogen vs Cindy Gamby4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJaneen Miklowski / Chipo Jolibois vs Molly White / Renee Weaver4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 SinglesMarisa Fiucci Rosen vs Kay McHolm3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesLishan Zhang / Marybeth Esposito vs Madison Altman / Ashley Gastin6-4, 3-6, 0-1
2025-06-21vs NEO/White/A18/4.0WLost 04
L#1 DoublesMarisa Fiucci Rosen / Kristin Chuko vs Molly White / Michelle Simmons4-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesHolly Yotter vs Cindy Gamby2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesLishan Zhang / Marybeth Esposito vs Ashley Gastin / Madison Altman6-0, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesSusan Vinborg / Lisa Bockhoff vs Kay McHolm / Trina Kelley4-6, 2-6
2025-06-03vs A18 4.0W SP1 EffingerWon 32
W#1 DoublesMarisa Fiucci Rosen / Carolann Sterkenburg vs Ellie Effinger / Elizabeth DeLuca7-5, 6-1
W#1 SinglesMarybeth Esposito vs Gina Costanzo6-4, 6-0
L#2 DoublesKristin Chuko / Patricia Mercuri vs MAGGIE GRAY / Jennifer Kirchner3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 SinglesMona Ascha vs Sarah Grauel2-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLaura Hyres / Susan Vinborg vs Christine Brucken / Colleen Joyce2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2024-07-08vs A18 4.0W SP1 EffingerLost 23
L#1 DoublesLishan Zhang / Chipo Jolibois vs Ellie Effinger / Elizabeth DeLuca3-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesMarisa Fiucci Rosen vs Gina Costanzo6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJaneen Miklowski / Carolann Sterkenburg vs Amy Gray / MAGGIE GRAY7-6, 6-3
L#2 SinglesMarybeth Esposito vs Sarah Grauel5-7, 4-6
L#3 DoublesKristin Chuko / Susan Vinborg vs Colleen Joyce / Jennifer Kirchner2-6, 1-6
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 NEOTA A18&O 4.0 Women Summer 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 3.45 estimated across 14 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.

3.95
Chelsea Rogen
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.68
Janeen Miklowski
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.68
Carolann Sterkenburg
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.66
Marisa Fiucci Rosen
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
3.54
Kristin Chuko
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.43
Chipo Jolibois
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.38
Lisa Bockhoff
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published
3.37
Mona Ascha
usually #1 Singles 86%, also #2 Singles 14% · published
3.36
Kathleen Aranavage
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.33
Susan Vinborg
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.30
Patricia Mercuri
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.29
Lishan Zhang
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.23
Laura Hyres
usually #2 Singles 38%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.15
Holly Yotter
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3.5
Marybeth Esposito
usually #2 Doubles 25%, also #3 Doubles 25% · 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.

Patricia Mercuri + Kathleen Aranavage15762% games+10.6% vs expected
Marybeth Esposito + Lishan Zhang7950% games+10.3% vs expected
Patricia Mercuri + Marybeth Esposito6163% games+2.5% vs expected
Chipo Jolibois + Lishan Zhang3742% games+1.9% vs expected
Patricia Mercuri + Kristin Chuko9751% games+0.1% vs expected
Janeen Miklowski + Chipo Jolibois3250% games−0.2% vs expected
Susan Vinborg + Kathleen Aranavage2840% games−2.1% vs expected
Lishan Zhang + Lisa Bockhoff4745% games−2.2% vs expected
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
Chelsea Rogen
12W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%66%34%
3.95
Janeen Miklowski
77W–90L career · 2 lines in 2025
8%91%1%
3.68
4
Carolann Sterkenburg
46W–40L career · 3 lines in 2025
8%91%1%
3.68
Marisa Fiucci Rosen
61W–59L career · 4 lines in 2025
11%88%<1%
3.66
Kristin Chuko
215W–144L career · 4 lines in 2025
39%61%<1%
3.54
3.5
Chipo Jolibois
85W–57L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%69%31%
3.43
Lisa Bockhoff
30W–45L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.38
Mona Ascha
34W–17L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%84%16%
3.37
Kathleen Aranavage
147W–83L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%86%14%
3.36
Susan Vinborg
43W–66L career · 3 lines in 2025
90%10%<1%
3.33
Patricia Mercuri
171W–118L career · 1 line in 2025
1%93%6%
3.30
Lishan Zhang
132W–84L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.29
Laura Hyres
73W–55L career · 8 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.23
3.5
Holly Yotter
69W–72L career · 3 lines in 2025
13%86%<1%
3.15
Marybeth Esposito
115W–74L career · 4 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.