Teams

The Osterizers

2021 USTA ADULT 40 & OVER · Ladies 4.0 - 40 & OVER

8 players · average NTRP 3.88 / WYOMING

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 →
Schedule3 played
2021-07-18vs City SlickersLost 12
L#1 DoublesCheryl Johnson / Michelle Schilling vs Connie Bartich / Sandra Andersen5-7, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMegan Hayes / Ellen Laubhan vs Kevan Ommen / Lisa Moses6-2, 6-2
L#3 DoublesAlyson Hagy / Sharon Buccino vs Katie Scanlan / Kathy Adamson4-6, 5-7
2021-07-17vs City SlickersLost 03
L#1 DoublesLinda Miller / Sonda Huhta vs Lisa Trujillo-Dunn / Paula Lawson5-7, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMegan Hayes / Paige Woodard vs Kathy Adamson / Lisa Hulsman1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesAlyson Hagy / Sharon Buccino vs Sandra Andersen / Connie Bartich1-6, 6-2, 0-1
2021-07-17vs City SlickersLost 03
L#1 DoublesEllen Laubhan / Sharon Buccino vs Kevan Ommen / Kathy Adamson1-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesSonda Huhta / Linda Miller vs Paula Lawson / Lisa Hulsman6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMichelle Schilling / Vicky Kmetz vs Lisa Trujillo-Dunn / Lisa Moses5-7, 6-7
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 standings2 teams · Ladies 4.0 - 40 & OVER
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1City Slickers30102888
2The Osterizers0321021132

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 3.59 estimated across 3 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.

3.83
Sonda Huhta
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
Alyson Hagy
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.61
Ellen Laubhan
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.33
Vicky Kmetz
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Megan Hayes
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Michelle Schilling
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Paige Woodard
published
Sharon Buccino
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · 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.

Megan Hayes + Ellen Laubhan8156% games+0.4% vs expected
Sharon Buccino + Ellen Laubhan4347% gamesnot enough data
Sharon Buccino + Alyson Hagy1649% 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.

4
Sonda Huhta
98W–85L career · 2 lines in 2021
1%90%10%
3.83
4
Alyson Hagy
13W–25L career · 2 lines in 2021
not enough data
4
Ellen Laubhan
128W–94L career · 2 lines in 2021
20%80%<1%
3.61
3.5
Vicky Kmetz
38W–49L career · 1 line in 2021
1%90%9%
3.33
Megan Hayes
14W–3L career · 2 lines in 2021
not enough data
Michelle Schilling
8W–7L career · 2 lines in 2021
not enough data
Paige Woodard
0W–8L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Sharon Buccino
16W–17L career · 3 lines in 2021
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.