Teams

Drop Shot Divas

2022 55&Over Women · 7.0

9 players · average NTRP 3.25 / WESTERN REGION

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 →
Schedule8 played
2022-08-02vs SYR: RadoffLost 12
L#1 DoublesSally Pearson / Melody Fredrickson vs Mindy Turner / Elizabeth Hill2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesTina Nabinger / Shirley Yablonski vs Julie Grossman / Kim Waale3-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesKathleen Jordan / Mary-Ellen Cereo vs Nancy Radoff / Lori Kunz6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2022-07-26vs MannixWon 30
W#1 DoublesShirley Yablonski / Melody Fredrickson vs Sandy Sulik / Christine Scollay6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesSally Pearson / Lynn Cifonelli vs Renee de Nevers / Lisa Cavallaro6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesKathleen Jordan / Mary-Ellen Cereo vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-07-12vs SYR: RadoffLost 03
L#1 DoublesJohanna Kmetz / Shirley Yablonski vs Cynthia Vulcano / Regina Black3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesTina Nabinger / Melody Fredrickson vs Mindy Turner / Marylou Watson6-0, 6-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesKathleen Jordan / Barbara Crane vs Juliet Concilla / Karen Nardella0-6, 2-6
2022-07-05vs MannixWon 20
W#1 DoublesJohanna Kmetz / Shirley Yablonski vs Jana Kasik / Sandy Sulik6-4, 3-2
W#2 DoublesTina Nabinger / Melody Fredrickson vs Elaine Quintana / Renee de Nevers6-0, 6-3
2022-06-21vs SYR: RadoffLost 12
L#1 DoublesSally Pearson / Melody Fredrickson vs Regina Black / Sharon Gerber1-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesTina Nabinger / Barbara Crane vs Elizabeth Hill / Joanne Engelhardt2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesJohanna Kmetz / Shirley Yablonski vs Susan Greetham / Marla Share6-1, 6-2
2022-06-14vs MannixWon 30
W#1 DoublesSally Pearson / Melody Fredrickson vs Jana Kasik / Sandy Sulik6-2, 7-5
W#2 DoublesTina Nabinger / Shirley Yablonski vs Lisa Cavallaro / Elaine Quintana6-3, 7-5
W#3 DoublesBarbara Crane / Kathleen Jordan vs Kathleen Mannix / Renee de Nevers6-1, 6-1
2022-05-31vs SYR: RadoffLost 12
W#1 DoublesSally Pearson / Shirley Yablonski vs Marla Share / Regina Black6-4, 7-5
L#2 DoublesLynn Cifonelli / Tina Nabinger vs Julie Grossman / Kim Waale5-7, 0-6
L#3 DoublesBarbara Crane / Johanna Kmetz vs Gwenn Judge / Ruth Sikora1-6, 3-4
2022-05-24vs MannixWon 30
W#1 DoublesSally Pearson / Melody Fredrickson vs Jana Kasik / Elaine Quintana6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJohanna Kmetz / Shirley Yablonski vs Mara Mulligan / Sandy Sulik6-3, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesTina Nabinger / Lynn Cifonelli vs Christine Scollay / Lisa Cavallaro6-0, 6-3
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 standings3 teams · 7.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SYR: Radoff701837111
2Drop Shot Divas44141022190
3Mannix0712040242

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 3.06 estimated across 4 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.

3.24
Melody Fredrickson
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
3.05
Shirley Yablonski
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published
3.02
Johanna Kmetz
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
2.92
Kathleen Jordan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Barbara Crane
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Lynn Cifonelli
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Mary-Ellen Cereo
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Sally Pearson
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
Tina Nabinger
usually #2 Doubles 86%, also #3 Doubles 14% · 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.

Johanna Kmetz + Shirley Yablonski10459% games−0.9% vs expected
Kathleen Jordan + Melody Fredrickson1536% games−5.1% vs expected
Sally Pearson + Shirley Yablonski8354% gamesnot enough data
Kathleen Jordan + Sally Pearson3347% gamesnot enough data
Kathleen Jordan + Shirley Yablonski3344% gamesnot enough data
Tina Nabinger + Shirley Yablonski3251% gamesnot enough data
Melody Fredrickson + Shirley Yablonski2350% gamesnot enough data
Johanna Kmetz + Kathleen Jordan134 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.

Melody Fredrickson
32W–61L career · 7 lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.24
Shirley Yablonski
63W–57L career · 8 lines in 2022
34%66%<1%
3.05
Johanna Kmetz
39W–54L career · 5 lines in 2022
44%56%<1%
3.02
3.5
Kathleen Jordan
81W–128L career · 4 lines in 2022
74%26%<1%
2.92
3
Barbara Crane
13W–56L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Lynn Cifonelli
16W–11L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Mary-Ellen Cereo
28W–39L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Sally Pearson
18W–37L career · 6 lines in 2022
not enough data
Tina Nabinger
24W–71L career · 7 lines in 2022
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.