Teams

NITA S 70W55c Rush Copley-Adams

2024 NITA3 Summer Adult 55 & Over · NITA Summer Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.31 / NORTHERN ILLINOIS

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 →
Schedule6 played
2024-08-06vs NITA S 70W55a Naperville-BianchiLost 03
L#1 DoublesDebbi Landorf / Gail Wolf vs Marie Hajduk / Maureen Henderson3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesLisa Korte / Cathy Albrecht vs Stephanie Batka / Larisa Adamian6-7, 1-6
L#3 DoublesSharon Martinez / Janet Juarez vs Cindy MacDonald / Denise McKenna1-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesMary Baker / Nancy Williford vs Suzi O'Connell / Leslie Barrows2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Gudgeon / Janet Juarez vs Teresa Hunter / Elizabeth Michael4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesSharon Martinez / DONNA SAGER vs Becky Smith / Connie Lutz5-7, 5-1, 0-1
W#1 DoublesGail Wolf / Lisa Korte vs Janet Trimble / Lisa Ventrella6-3, 7-6
L#2 DoublesMary Baker / Nancy Williford vs Holly Kost / Marisa Mancini7-6, 5-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesSharon Martinez / Cathy Albrecht vs Jeanine Janzen / Wendy Leto6-2, 3-6, 1-0
2024-07-09vs NITA S 70W55b Wheaton-OhlsonWon 30
W#1 DoublesDebbi Landorf / Lisa Korte vs Laura King / Karen McClure6-0, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCathy Albrecht / Nancy Williford vs Judy Harris / Julie Bump6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesCatherine Golz / Sharon Martinez vs Kara Bittner / Janice Ohlson6-2, 6-3
L#1 DoublesLisa Korte / Debbi Landorf vs Julie Burke-Concannon / Tracy Reese5-7, 4-6
L#2 DoublesMary Baker / Janet Juarez vs Elizabeth Sheridan / Anne Ruden5-7, 1-6
L#3 DoublesNancy Williford / Gail Wolf vs Ann Chapman / Christine Lee1-6, 0-6
2024-06-18vs NITA S 70W55e Challenge-SharpWon 30
W#1 DoublesDebbi Landorf / Lisa Korte vs Catherine Wasylenko / Micki Naal6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesGail Wolf / Nancy Williford vs Denise Rippetoe-Reed / Ajita Chander6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Gudgeon / Cathy Albrecht vs Cathy Abbott / Eileen Gillstrom7-6, 6-1
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 standings7 teams · NITA Summer Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA S 70W55a Naperville-Bianchi601627126
2NITA S 70W55g Naperville-Sheridan/Ruden511449115
3NITA S 70W55d Courts Plus-Bursch/Roth3310819168
4NITA S 70W55c Rush Copley-Adams3381021164
5NITA S 70W55e Challenge-Sharp2471124159
6NITA S 70W55b Wheaton-Ohlson1541429183
7NITA S 70W55f Vaughan-Sherman/Jirsa1541430192

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 3.03 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.

3.39
Debbi Landorf
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.32
Gail Wolf
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.22
Diane Fonte
published 3.5
3.18
Cathy Albrecht
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.14
Lisa Korte
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.00
DONNA SAGER
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.99
Elizabeth Gudgeon
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.79
Janet Juarez
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.70
Sharon Martinez
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.57
Catherine Golz
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Jan MacK
published
Nancy Williford
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · 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.

Janet Juarez + Cathy Albrecht12363% games+8.3% vs expected
Debbi Landorf + Lisa Korte18754% games−1.8% vs expected
DONNA SAGER + Cathy Albrecht101352% games−1.8% vs expected
Janet Juarez + DONNA SAGER3553% games−5.4% vs expected
Nancy Williford + Catherine Golz11433% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Williford + Gail Wolf7845% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Williford + Sharon Martinez21137% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Williford + Diane Fonte6552% gamesnot 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.

3.5
Debbi Landorf
191W–79L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%78%22%
3.39
Gail Wolf
101W–100L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Diane Fonte
47W–39L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Cathy Albrecht
102W–93L career · 4 lines in 2024
10%89%1%
3.18
Lisa Korte
93W–59L career · 5 lines in 2024
16%83%<1%
3.14
3.5
DONNA SAGER
58W–91L career · 1 line in 2024
50%50%<1%
3.00
3.5
Elizabeth Gudgeon
45W–75L career · 2 lines in 2024
53%47%<1%
2.99
3
Janet Juarez
84W–112L career · 3 lines in 2024
2%92%6%
2.79
3
Sharon Martinez
115W–167L career · 4 lines in 2024
7%91%2%
2.70
3
Catherine Golz
40W–60L career · 1 line in 2024
31%69%<1%
2.57
Jan MacK
40W–34L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Nancy Williford
71W–98L career · 5 lines in 2024
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.