Teams

WB: Pezza/Polikoff

2022 RI TRI Level · 3.5 Women

4 players · average NTRP 3.33 / RHODE ISLAND

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
2022-11-13vs RP: LintonWon 10
W#1 DoublesMelissa Pezza / Dana Polikoff vs Katherine Linton / Karen Chasse6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2022-11-13vs HOF: FreitasLost 01
L#1 DoublesAnn Diver-Diehl / Brenda Burke vs Glenna Johnson / Kate Sisk1-6, 3-6
2022-11-06vs CC: DiNardo/LeiteLost 01
L#1 DoublesDana Polikoff / Brenda Burke vs Jennifer Leite / Nancy DiNardo4-6, 6-4, 0-1
2022-10-28vs HOF: FreitasLost 01
L#1 DoublesMelissa Pezza / Dana Polikoff vs Tiffany Conlon / Lauren Freitas1-6, 6-7
2022-10-13vs CC: DiNardo/LeiteLost 01
L#1 DoublesAnn Diver-Diehl / Brenda Burke vs Nancy DiNardo / Jennifer Leite4-6, 3-6
2022-09-21vs RP: LintonLost 01
L#1 DoublesBrenda Burke / Dana Polikoff vs Katherine Linton / Cynthia Belshe7-6, 5-7, 0-1
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 standings20 teams · 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1RW: represent/Marsh-Bush/Ashton#0303635
2CC: DiNardo/Leite0633765
3WB: Pezza/Polikoff06151172
4HOF: Freitas0770138
5EB: sMACk attack/MacLean/McGuire0880010
6EB: Lucky LADies/Pippitt0871351
7WB: Pembroke/Ceceri0862558
8EB: LFG/Laforge/Gustafson0862653
9WB: Lawton/Padula0853764
10WB: Collins0844858
11RP: Linton0844965
12FC: Siempre Tennis/Fontes08351079
13CC: It's All About Me/Robertson/Preve08351076
14CC: Tightly Strung/Paletta08441068
15WB: Charlie's Angels/Salvator08441076
16CC: Intensity/Kelly08351173
17RP: Werchadlo/Tucci08261283
18HOF: Griffin08261286
19CC: Litmanovich/Zhukov08261489
20RP: Burke08171593

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 2.92 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.

Brenda Burke
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.06
Dana Polikoff
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.79
Ann Diver-Diehl
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
Melissa Pezza
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.

Brenda Burke + Dana Polikoff3450% games+3.0% vs expected
Melissa Pezza + Dana Polikoff111149% games+1.5% vs expected
Ann Diver-Diehl + Brenda Burke1636% games−10.8% vs expected
Ann Diver-Diehl + Melissa Pezza224 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.

3.5
Brenda Burke
8W–19L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Dana Polikoff
26W–27L career · 4 lines in 2022
34%66%<1%
3.06
3
Ann Diver-Diehl
24W–31L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
2.79
Melissa Pezza
27W–36L 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.