Teams

Stanwich

2023 55&Over Women · 9.0

10 players · average NTRP 4.38 / SOUTHERN 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
2023-08-01vs Rye Racquet ClubSplit 11
L#1 DoublesAbigail Burke / Cynthia Dardis vs Kim Wagman / Julie Ricciardi0-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesJill Bornstein / Patricia VanTassel-Cromie vs Sanae Oyama Diller / Debbie Cannavino2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2023-07-31vs Eastern/Chirico/55&Over9.0WWon 20
W#1 DoublesCynthia Dardis / Abigail Burke vs Carol Levine / Sylvia Gross5-7, 4-1
W#2 DoublesSandra Eddy / Cynthia Holland vs Alice Levine / Alicia Ifshin6-3, 6-3
2023-07-11vs Rye Racquet ClubSplit 11
L#1 DoublesCynthia Dardis / Patricia VanTassel-Cromie vs Julie Ricciardi / Kim Wagman7-5, 1-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesJill Bornstein / Abigail Burke vs Caroline Murray / Kate Verni6-1, 6-3
2023-07-05vs Eastern/Chirico/55&Over9.0WLost 12
L#1 DoublesMary Mondello / Jill Grayson vs Carol Chirico / Karen Gill0-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesCynthia Dardis / Abigail Burke vs Alice Levine / Kathy Grainger Hobbins3-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesCynthia Holland / Patricia VanTassel-Cromie vs Ingrid Lopp / Cinta Delmonaco-Kemp2-6, 0-6
2023-06-27vs Eastern/Chirico/55&Over9.0WLost 03
L#1 DoublesJill Bornstein / Abigail Burke vs Karen Garfield / Alicia Ifshin1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesCynthia Dardis / Jill Grayson vs Carol Chirico / Carol Powers0-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesCynthia Holland / Sandra Eddy vs Ingrid Lopp / Cinta Delmonaco-Kemp5-7, 2-6
2023-06-13vs Rye Racquet ClubLost 12
L#1 DoublesAbigail Burke / Cynthia Dardis vs Julie Ricciardi / Louise Fischer3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesTracy Fincher / Jill Bornstein vs Kim Wagman / Carolyn Cruz5-7, 7-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJill Grayson / Cynthia Holland vs Susan Friedlaender / Kate Verni4-6, 2-6
2023-05-23vs Rye Racquet ClubWon 21
W#1 DoublesAbigail Burke / Cynthia Dardis vs Susan Friedlaender / Stacey Essaid6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesTracy Fincher / Jill Bornstein vs Christie Manning / Louise Fischer4-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesSandra Eddy / Cynthia Holland vs Jane Foster / Theresa Oconnor6-3, 6-3
2023-05-16vs Eastern/Chirico/55&Over9.0WLost 12
L#1 DoublesAbigail Burke / Cynthia Dardis vs Alicia Ifshin / Karen Garfield4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesJill Bornstein / Mary Mondello vs Carol Chirico / Carol Powers2-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesSandra Eddy / Cynthia Holland vs Carrie Rabuse / Carol Levine2-6, 6-3, 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 standings3 teams · 9.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Eastern/Chirico/55&Over9.0W08131122176
2Rye Racquet Club08111328220
3Stanwich08101433239

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 4.04 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.

Cynthia Holland
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4.5
4.18
Jill Bornstein
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
4.10
Cynthia Dardis
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.02
Abigail Burke
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
3.84
Mary Mondello
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
Jill Grayson
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Patricia VanTassel-Cromie
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Sandra Eddy
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Tracy Fincher
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Usha Subramaniam
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.

Cynthia Holland + Sandra Eddy11455% games+4.1% vs expected
Cynthia Dardis + Abigail Burke71843% games+0.5% vs expected
Jill Grayson + Mary Mondello2537% games−12.9% vs expected
Patricia VanTassel-Cromie + Abigail Burke1641% gamesnot enough data
Cynthia Dardis + Patricia VanTassel-Cromie1443% gamesnot enough data
Jill Grayson + Cynthia Holland2342% gamesnot enough data
Cynthia Dardis + Jill Grayson044 matchesnot enough data
Jill Bornstein + Abigail Burke134 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.

4.5
Cynthia Holland
29W–26L career · 6 lines in 2023
not enough data
Jill Bornstein
20W–31L career · 6 lines in 2023
8%91%1%
4.18
4.5
Cynthia Dardis
14W–33L career · 8 lines in 2023
22%78%<1%
4.10
4.5
Abigail Burke
10W–33L career · 8 lines in 2023
44%55%<1%
4.02
4
Mary Mondello
243W–170L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%88%11%
3.84
Jill Grayson
6W–24L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Patricia VanTassel-Cromie
7W–15L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Sandra Eddy
37W–32L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Tracy Fincher
1W–2L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Usha Subramaniam
0W–2L career · no lines in 2023
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.