Teams

LAL Womens Tri-Level Low_Lynn

2026 WI Tri Level · WI Tri Level Low Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2026-08-06vs LAL Womens Tri-Level Low-RoxieLost 02
L#1 DoublesCathy Zapotocny / Penny Precour vs Laura Reutlinger / Erica Osley4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesJonella Rademacher / Antelma Nicolai vs Amy Harter / Adrienne Loh0-6, 0-6
2026-08-03vs LAL Womens Tri-Level Low-RoxieLost 12
L#1 DoublesLeah Dietrich / Lynn Frise vs Roxie Anderson / Laura Reutlinger0-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesRose Wettstein / Penny Precour vs Michelle Rank / Nancy Winberg6-4, 6-4
L#3 DoublesAntelma Nicolai / Jonella Rademacher vs Amanda Wilkie / Amy Harter6-7, 1-6
2026-07-30vs LAL Womens Tri-Level Low_NicoleWon 21
L#1 DoublesLeah Dietrich / Cathy Zapotocny vs Jeanne Miller / Anna Rydeski6-3, 6-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMolly Stenger / Julie Zink vs Regina Jones / Shanon Torgerud6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesLaura Mitchell / Margaret Hanson vs Barb Buswell / Lora Cadwell6-4, 6-0
2026-07-23vs LAL Womens Tri-Level Low_HannahWon 21
L#1 DoublesMolly Stenger / Sandra Scanoni Albers vs Jennifer Carr / Ellen Seithamer2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesPenny Precour / Julie Zink vs Brittney Dechambeau / Danielle Engen6-1, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesErin Herbert / Jonella Rademacher vs Judith Engen / Mary Aschenbrenner1-6, 6-1, 1-0
2026-07-09vs LAL Womens Tri-Level Low_NicoleLost 12
L#1 DoublesLeah Dietrich / Julie Zink vs Jeanne Miller / Anna Rydeski1-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesSandra Scanoni Albers / Lynn Frise vs Kristine Bartley / Shanon Torgerud6-1, 6-0
L#3 DoublesJonella Rademacher / Erin Herbert vs Lora Cadwell / Barb Buswell4-6, 0-6
2026-07-02vs LAL Womens Tri-Level Low_HannahLost 12
L#1 DoublesLynn Frise / Cathy Zapotocny vs Ellen Seithamer / Jennifer Carr3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesPenny Precour / Molly Stenger vs Hannah Exner / Brittney Dechambeau6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesAntelma Nicolai / Anna Olson vs Mary Aschenbrenner / Judith Engen2-6, 0-6
2026-06-25vs LAL Womens Tri-Level Low-RoxieSplit 11
L#1 DoublesSandra Scanoni Albers / Molly Stenger vs Erica Osley / Laura Reutlinger2-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesLynn Frise / Julie Zink vs Michelle Rank / Nancy Winberg6-3, 5-7, 1-0
2026-06-22vs LAL Womens Tri-Level Low_HannahWon 21
L#1 DoublesMolly Stenger / Sandra Scanoni Albers vs Amy Marcou / Ellen Seithamer6-3, 2-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesLynn Frise / Julie Zink vs Hannah Exner / Brittney Dechambeau6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAntelma Nicolai / Anna Olson vs Mary Aschenbrenner / Judith Engen7-6, 5-7, 1-0
2026-06-18vs LAL Womens Tri-Level Low_NicoleLost 12
L#1 DoublesMolly Stenger / Leah Dietrich vs Tamara Byrne / Jeanne Miller1-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesSandra Scanoni Albers / Penny Precour vs Nicole Hoff / Shanon Torgerud6-2, 6-3
L#3 DoublesJonella Rademacher / Laura Mitchell vs Kristine Bartley / Lora Cadwell4-6, 0-6
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 WI Tri Level Low Women 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 3.11 estimated across 2 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.

3.53
Cathy Zapotocny
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
2.70
Antelma Nicolai
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Jonella Rademacher
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Julie Zink
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
Leah Dietrich
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Lynn Frise
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
Margaret Hanson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Molly Stenger
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Penny Precour
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
Rose Wettstein
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Sandra Scanoni Albers
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · 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.

Sandra Scanoni Albers + Molly Stenger5556% games+16.0% vs expected
Julie Zink + Leah Dietrich6265% gamesnot enough data
Leah Dietrich + Cathy Zapotocny1542% gamesnot enough data
Julie Zink + Lynn Frise303 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
Cathy Zapotocny
7W–25L career · 3 lines in 2026
43%57%<1%
3.53
3
Antelma Nicolai
1W–5L career · type S · 4 lines in 2026
8%91%2%
2.70
Jonella Rademacher
1W–5L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Julie Zink
13W–9L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Leah Dietrich
8W–18L career · 4 lines in 2026
not enough data
Lynn Frise
17W–8L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Margaret Hanson
1W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Molly Stenger
19W–11L career · 6 lines in 2026
not enough data
Penny Precour
7W–3L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Rose Wettstein
7W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Sandra Scanoni Albers
11W–7L career · 5 lines in 2026
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.