Teams

CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD Brown

Early Start Fall CITA Indy Adult 40 & Over · CITA Indy 40 & Over 4.0 Women, F

11 players · average NTRP 4.00 / CENTRAL INDIANA

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
2025-11-18vs CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD KeatonLost 02
L#1 DoublesAnne Sharp / Lindsay Schroeder vs Brenda Cox / Karen Brabender7-5, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesHeidi Somers / Katelyn Marando vs Lesley Cahalan / Maureen Hubbard3-6, 0-6
2025-11-11vs CIN A40 4.0W TU PATC AckermanSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMaura Lee / Lisa Martin vs Diane Turpen / Joanna Cieciek6-4, 1-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesCindy Martin / Amy Deckard vs Kathleen Eldridge / Cynthia Rathjen6-1, 6-1
2025-11-04vs CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD LynchWon 20
W#1 DoublesJanette Martin / Katelyn Marando vs Mallory Inselberg / Meryl Schroeder6-2, 7-5
W#2 DoublesLiz Shock / Raquel Richardson vs DEBORAH HAMEL / Sarah Lynch6-2, 6-1
2025-10-21vs CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD StrobelSplit 11
L#1 DoublesAmy Deckard / Janette Martin vs Elizabeth Lacy / Belinda Strobel4-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesSarah Brown / Liz Shock vs Christie Ewing / Tracy Fulling6-4, 7-6
2025-10-14vs CIN A40 4.0W TU CSWS HackneyWon 21
W#1 DoublesLindsay Schroeder / Anne Sharp vs Ann Osuntokun / Lorinne Banister6-1, 6-3
L#1 SinglesCatherine McCann vs Cheryl Miller6-2, 2-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesJanette Martin / Raquel Richardson vs Jennifer Medler / Jennifer Roberts6-1, 6-0
2025-10-07vs CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD FaulkenbergLost 02
L#1 SinglesCatherine McCann vs Belinda Denning1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesLiz Shock / Katelyn Marando vs Lisa Lindsey / Maria Thompson3-6, 1-6
2025-09-23vs CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD GuptaWon 20
W#1 DoublesAnne Sharp / Lindsay Schroeder vs Jennifer Skulski / Beth Pychinka6-0, 6-2
W#2 DoublesHeidi Somers / Maura Lee vs Jill Chlystun / Tracy Miller6-0, 6-0
2025-09-16vs CIN A40 4.0W TU CRC BrueggemanLost 03
L#1 DoublesHeidi Somers / Janette Martin vs Brandyn Ohrvall / Connie Glass6-4, 2-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesCatherine McCann vs Jayne Guerrieri5-7, 6-1, 0-1
L#2 DoublesSarah Brown / Raquel Richardson vs Kimberly Leary / Angie Bratton4-6, 6-5, 1-0
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 standings9 teams · CITA Indy 40 & Over 4.0 Women, F
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD Faulkenberg7120410154
2CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD Keaton7118616173
3CIN A40 4.0W TU CRC Brueggeman7118619194
4CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD Brown53131123175
5CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD Lynch44111329230
6CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD Strobel2691533232
7CIN A40 4.0W TU PATC Ackerman2661837245
8CIN A40 4.0W TU IRCD Gupta2661839257
9CIN A40 4.0W TU CSWS Hackney0871737255

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 3.57 estimated across 10 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.

Cindy Martin
published 4
3.73
Heidi Somers
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.71
Anne Sharp
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.64
Lindsay Schroeder
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.64
Katelyn Marando
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.60
Raquel Richardson
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.51
Maura Lee
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.48
Catherine McCann
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.46
Amy Deckard
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.45
Janette Martin
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.44
Liz Shock
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Liz Shock + Anne Sharp7360% games+10.2% vs expected
Catherine McCann + Janette Martin4649% games+2.6% vs expected
Lindsay Schroeder + Anne Sharp12656% games+1.6% vs expected
Liz Shock + Raquel Richardson4255% games−2.3% vs expected
Maura Lee + Heidi Somers2456% gamesnot enough data
Heidi Somers + Liz Shock314 matchesnot enough data
Heidi Somers + Cindy Martin224 matchesnot enough data
Liz Shock + Cindy Martin404 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
Cindy Martin
108W–51L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Heidi Somers
90W–97L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%5%95%
3.73
4
Anne Sharp
81W–46L career · 3 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.71
Lindsay Schroeder
54W–20L career · 3 lines in 2026
16%84%1%
3.64
Katelyn Marando
38W–16L career · 3 lines in 2026
16%83%<1%
3.64
Raquel Richardson
74W–38L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%25%75%
3.60
Maura Lee
43W–56L career · 2 lines in 2026
48%52%<1%
3.51
4
Catherine McCann
123W–95L career · 3 lines in 2026
54%46%<1%
3.48
4
Amy Deckard
134W–128L career · 2 lines in 2026
60%40%<1%
3.46
Janette Martin
85W–149L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.45
Liz Shock
144W–72L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%65%34%
3.44

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.