Teams

MR:Get A Grip;Baxter/Casis

2021 WMA Tri-Level (Fall 2021) · 3.5 Women 1

4 players · average NTRP 3.75 / WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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
2021-12-11vs ETC:Triple Threat:MacCollWon 10
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Baxter / Debra Gendreau vs Carol MacColl / Susan Anderson6-2, 6-3
2021-11-28vs BWAC:AndrettaWon 10
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Baxter / Donnabelle Casis vs Robyn Huban / Robin Yates7-5, 2-3, 1-0
2021-11-20vs LTC:PaulWon 10
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Baxter / Debra Gendreau vs Jordyn Paul / Lynn Paul7-6, 5-3
2021-11-14vs LTC:Mommy Aggression:FoardLost 01
L#1 DoublesCheryl Ruell / Donnabelle Casis vs Lori McMahon / Irene Madden4-6, 6-7
2021-11-03vs LTC:Double Trouble:BeaulieuLost 01
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Baxter / Cheryl Ruell vs Noreen Little / Moira Donoghue4-6, 2-6
2021-10-13vs ETC:Philbin/FollansbeeLost 01
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Baxter / Donnabelle Casis vs Melissa Follansbee / Laurie Philbin6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2021-10-12vs Bay:Party at the Net:Scott/MasonWon 10
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Baxter / Donnabelle Casis vs Melinda Mason / Suzanne Koch7-6, 4-2
2021-10-10vs LTC:Bradway/WillardWon 10
W#1 DoublesCheryl Ruell / Suzanne Baxter vs Amy Willard / Karen Bradway7-6, 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 standings5 teams · 3.5 Women 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1ETC:Philbin/Follansbee8080139
2MR:Get A Grip;Baxter/Casis5353774
3Bay:Party at the Net:Scott/Mason35351279
4LTC:Bradway/Willard35351286
5LTC:Mommy Aggression:Foard26261279

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 3.46 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.

3.77
Suzanne Baxter
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Donnabelle Casis
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.14
Cheryl Ruell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Debra Gendreau
usually #1 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.

Suzanne Baxter + Debra Gendreau19366% games+13.4% vs expected
Donnabelle Casis + Suzanne Baxter14662% games+11.5% vs expected
Cheryl Ruell + Donnabelle Casis224 matchesnot enough data
Cheryl Ruell + Suzanne Baxter213 matchesnot enough data
Donnabelle Casis + Debra Gendreau303 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.

Suzanne Baxter
219W–131L career · 7 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Donnabelle Casis
43W–36L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Cheryl Ruell
87W–106L career · 3 lines in 2022
14%86%<1%
3.14
Debra Gendreau
55W–15L career · 2 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.