Teams

CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W S Barrington Mulligan Sat 11 $17

CDTA ESL 40 & Over W · E

15 players · average NTRP 3.25 / CHICAGO

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 →
Schedule5 played
L#1 DoublesCathleen Garcia / Kathy Jo Pogorzelski vs Debra Feldman / Lynn Meyer4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesTena Bucalo / Muge Parmaksiz vs Diane Egan / Rita Eichner2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesDarlene Fuller / Kathy Jo Pogorzelski vs Alicia Tisbo / Jillian Melinyshyn2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesLaura Pearson / Elaine Pieropan vs Lori Bieniek / Diane Thomason3-6, 3-6
L#1 DoublesMaureen Hawkinson / Nanette Dickinson vs Amy Chudgar / Joanne Lund1-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#1 SinglesMuge Parmaksiz vs Yuliya Kravtsov5-7, 3-6
L#2 DoublesElaine Pieropan / Laura Pearson vs Deborah Berlin / Kathy Mahowald4-6, 3-6
L#1 DoublesKelly Berkowitz / Thelma Condon vs Svetlana Kanev / Denise Hazen2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesLaura Pearson / Maureen Hawkinson vs Patti Landreth / Laura McGrady3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesKimberly Lee / Elaine Pieropan vs Midge Mountin / Michelle Keefe5-7, 7-5, 0-1
L#1 DoublesCathleen Garcia / Christine Smith vs Marjorie Baltazar / Dawn Pollack6-7, 6-1, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCindy Mulligan / Kathy Jo Pogorzelski vs Agnieszka Fijol / Mandy Shaw2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesNanette Dickinson / Catie Burns vs Paula Grabow Duignan / Sarah Blankenbaker1-6, 2-6
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 standings11 teams · E
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W MT Bann Zusman Sat 4 $259030616177
2CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W TF Oak Park Roberts Fri 7:30 $2072241225279
3CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W Tam Lund Sat 1 $2072221431272
4CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W Tam Landreth Sun 3 $2063231334260
5CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W Heritage Morrison Sun 12 $2145171940306
6CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W Northbrook Zorn Sun 7 $2445152147328
7CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W Score Thompson Fri 7:30 $2035122044309
8CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W Tam Varcheva Sat 5 $2036152146331
9CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W River Trails Hanrahan Sat 5 $2018122452358
10(DROPPED) CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W MT Bann Vishnubhakat Sat 4 $2000000
11CDTA E 40&O W/E 3.5W S Barrington Mulligan Sat 11 $170862653329

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 3.15 estimated across 9 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.

3.74
Jarmila Singer
published
3.40
Cathleen Garcia
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.32
Thelma Condon
published 3.5
3.26
Kathy Jo Pogorzelski
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Darlene Fuller
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.14
Maureen Hawkinson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.06
Nanette Dickinson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.00
Laura Pearson
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Cindy Mulligan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.72
Elaine Pieropan
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.71
Catie Burns
published 3
Jennifer Welsh
published
Kelly Berkowitz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Muge Parmaksiz
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Tena Bucalo
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.

Elaine Pieropan + Maureen Hawkinson5550% games+5.8% vs expected
Darlene Fuller + Jarmila Singer10360% games+1.6% vs expected
Catie Burns + Laura Pearson13356% gamesnot enough data
Thelma Condon + Darlene Fuller6260% gamesnot enough data
Elaine Pieropan + Laura Pearson3547% gamesnot enough data
Cathleen Garcia + Laura Pearson3354% gamesnot enough data
Nanette Dickinson + Cindy Mulligan1436% gamesnot enough data
Cindy Mulligan + Maureen Hawkinson1443% 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.

Jarmila Singer
40W–31L career · no lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.74
3.5
Cathleen Garcia
45W–34L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%78%22%
3.40
3.5
Thelma Condon
53W–41L career · no lines in 2022
1%91%8%
3.32
Kathy Jo Pogorzelski
25W–39L career · 3 lines in 2022
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Darlene Fuller
35W–9L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Maureen Hawkinson
41W–53L career · 2 lines in 2022
14%86%<1%
3.14
Nanette Dickinson
21W–33L career · 2 lines in 2022
31%69%<1%
3.06
Laura Pearson
59W–55L career · 3 lines in 2022
51%49%<1%
3.00
3
Cindy Mulligan
23W–42L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
3
Elaine Pieropan
41W–66L career · 3 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.72
3
Catie Burns
71W–103L career · no lines in 2022
5%93%1%
2.71
Jennifer Welsh
13W–14L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Kelly Berkowitz
3W–10L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Muge Parmaksiz
10W–27L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Tena Bucalo
0W–1L career · no 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.