Teams

CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Bann Gordon Sun 12 $25

CDTA ESL 18 & Over W · E

11 players · average NTRP 3.38 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
2021-12-18Won 10
W#2 DoublesYan Gao / Ann Wachter vs Linda Murphy / Julie Carr7-6, 2-1
W#3 DoublesYan Gao / Ann Wachter vs Prabha Parameswaran / Lee Hart6-1, 6-4
L#3 DoublesYan Gao / Beatrisa Paz vs Anna Swanson / Sarah W Johnson2-6, 4-6
2021-12-04Won 10
W#3 DoublesMichele Anderson / Yan Gao vs Jackie Settimi / Elizabeth Lucy Buckley6-2, 7-5
L#3 DoublesMichele Anderson / Yan Gao vs Kristin Wittman / Nicole Toft2-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#3 DoublesYan Gao / Ann Wachter vs Katie Boyle / Graciela Vinaja6-1, 4-6, 1-0
2021-11-07Won 10
W#3 DoublesMichele Anderson / Yan Gao vs Icinkhorloo Batnasan / Paula Flowers3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2021-09-19Won 10
W#3 DoublesMichele Anderson / Yan Gao vs Darsha Desai / Molly Louden6-1, 6-3
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 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Chi Brown 1 Sun 2 $259132823263
2CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W S Barrington Burns Sat 11 $2082281228272
3CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W River Trails Cox Sun 6 $2082251537301
4CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Bann Gordon Sun 12 $2564221839296
5CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Chi Brown 2 Sat 6 $2555211940290
6CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W Tam Wolff Sun 3 $2055231743341
7CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W Heritage Werts Sat 3 $2155182248353
8CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Pal Watson Sun 1 $2546202047353
9CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W Centennial Wissig Sun 5 $2046152555366
10CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Pal Lange Sat 2 $2519122861396
11CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W Glenbrook Turdo Sun 3 $2501043674465

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 3.21 estimated across 8 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.

3.48
Allison Milmoe
published 3.5
3.41
Cheryl Ingram
usually #1 Doubles 25%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.22
Vilma Mitev
published 3.5
3.17
Halle Aten
published 3.5
3.15
Rachael Ulizio
published 3.5
3.15
Beatrisa Paz
published 3.5
3.07
Vanessa Rosengarden
published 3.5
3.04
Michele Anderson
usually #1 Singles 56%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Andrea Best
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
Laura Barnett
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Yan Gao
usually #3 Doubles 88%, also #2 Doubles 13% · 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.

Michele Anderson + Vilma Mitev101147% games+0.0% vs expected
Rachael Ulizio + Halle Aten16271% gamesnot enough data
Michele Anderson + Yan Gao9455% gamesnot enough data
Laura Barnett + Rachael Ulizio3644% gamesnot enough data
Halle Aten + Cheryl Ingram224 matchesnot enough data
Beatrisa Paz + Yan Gao044 matchesnot enough data
Allison Milmoe + Cheryl Ingram303 matchesnot enough data
Andrea Best + Vilma Mitev303 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
Allison Milmoe
113W–46L career · no lines in 2022
<1%57%43%
3.48
3.5
Cheryl Ingram
116W–69L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%76%24%
3.41
3.5
Vilma Mitev
111W–99L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.22
3.5
Halle Aten
72W–51L career · no lines in 2022
9%90%1%
3.17
3.5
Rachael Ulizio
106W–83L career · no lines in 2022
12%87%<1%
3.15
3.5
Beatrisa Paz
170W–136L career · no lines in 2022
13%87%<1%
3.15
3.5
Vanessa Rosengarden
57W–28L career · no lines in 2022
29%71%<1%
3.07
Michele Anderson
108W–67L career · 16 lines in 2022
37%63%<1%
3.04
2.5
Andrea Best
24W–58L career · 8 lines in 2022
not enough data
Laura Barnett
8W–27L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Yan Gao
77W–64L career · 8 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.