Teams

NITA E 40W18h Oak Lawn RC (Gaynor)

2023 NITA1 ESL Adult 18 & Over · NITA ESL 18 & Over 4.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.33 / NORTHERN ILLINOIS

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 DoublesSylwia Rakauskas / Simona Fojtikova vs Gretchen Langer / Tracy Gallo3-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesWendy Pochocki / Valerie Collopy vs Noelle Tepas / Jeanne Johnson3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesLisa Franco / Mary Richardson-Webb vs Sue Keough / Teri Andersen4-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesSylwia Rakauskas / Jennifer Gaynor vs Mary Sullivan / Kristy Sweigard4-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesLisa Parsons vs Meghan Jones1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesAngela Ratkovich / Wendy Pochocki vs Rebecca Bosack / Laurie Knutte3-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesNicole Ortman / Cheri Baker vs Karin Carney / Kelly Tenuta3-6, 2-6
2022-10-18vs NITA E 40W18b TAM (Farinas)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesSylwia Rakauskas / Simona Fojtikova vs Terri Whiting / Kitty Swanson0-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesMary Richardson-Webb / Lisa Franco vs Jessica Grizzell / Huan Chang0-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesValerie Collopy / Angela Ratkovich vs Tracy Merrell / Yumi Ida1-6, 1-6
L#1 DoublesJennifer Gaynor / Sylwia Rakauskas vs Cindy Sullivan / Renee Buxton6-3, 3-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesLisa Parsons vs Jennifer Lenahan0-6, 1-4
L#2 DoublesNicole Ortman / Wendy Pochocki vs MEREDITH BETTCHER / Valerie Nagel2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesLisa Franco / Mary Richardson-Webb vs Donna Matkovic / Margaret Logsdon1-6, 3-6
W#1 DoublesSylwia Rakauskas / Jennifer McClelland vs Kristine Jurczyk / Desiree Witte7-5, 0-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesAmy Tyree vs Ginger Riessen1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesWendy Pochocki / Jennifer Gaynor vs Christine Campanelli / Anna Dau0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesLynn Zolfo / Mary Richardson-Webb vs Lydia Vaughan / Leah Starkman0-6, 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 standings7 teams · NITA ESL 18 & Over 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA E 40W18c Heritage TC (Campanelli/Jurczyk)6018614134
2NITA E 40W18g Norris Center (Saguto)5117718163
3NITA E 40W18d Score (Bianchi/Knutte)4217719169
4NITA E 40W18b TAM (Farinas)3315923188
5NITA E 40W18a Naperville TC (Madura)24121226219
6NITA E 40W18e Rush Copley (Stine)1542040237
7NITA E 40W18h Oak Lawn RC (Gaynor)0612347285

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 3.22 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.

3.45
Lisa Parsons
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.29
Simona Fojtikova
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Amy Tyree
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
Angela Ratkovich
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.91
Wendy Pochocki
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Cheri Baker
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Jennifer Gaynor
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Lisa Franco
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Lynn Zolfo
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Mary Richardson-Webb
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Nicole Ortman
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Sylwia Rakauskas
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Terri Rogers
published
Valerie Collopy
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Jennifer Gaynor + Sylwia Rakauskas211853% games+5.1% vs expected
Valerie Collopy + Lynn Zolfo4742% games−1.4% vs expected
Mary Richardson-Webb + Lynn Zolfo111245% games−1.5% vs expected
Angela Ratkovich + Valerie Collopy1830% games−11.2% vs expected
Simona Fojtikova + Sylwia Rakauskas0635% games−11.8% vs expected
Angela Ratkovich + Wendy Pochocki01524% games−13.6% vs expected
Mary Richardson-Webb + Lisa Franco1829% games−14.4% vs expected
Wendy Pochocki + Valerie Collopy0730% 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.

Lisa Parsons
8W–21L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%65%35%
3.45
Simona Fojtikova
10W–19L career · 2 lines in 2023
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Amy Tyree
30W–58L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
3.5
Angela Ratkovich
2W–33L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Wendy Pochocki
16W–83L career · 4 lines in 2023
75%25%<1%
2.91
3
Cheri Baker
15W–38L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Jennifer Gaynor
35W–45L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Lisa Franco
1W–23L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Lynn Zolfo
16W–36L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Mary Richardson-Webb
15W–31L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Nicole Ortman
5W–16L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Sylwia Rakauskas
44W–45L career · 5 lines in 2023
not enough data
Terri Rogers
0W–4L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Valerie Collopy
7W–31L career · 2 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.