Teams

NITA S 35W40j Rush Copley (Gudgeon)

2022 NITA3 Summer Adult 40 & Over · NITA Summer Adult 40 & Over 3.5 Women

16 players · average NTRP 3.29 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
L#1 DoublesLyn Reed / Cheryl Engle vs Catherine Wasylenko / Allycn Grcevic3-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesKelly Coyle vs Sheila Naylor4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesElizabeth O'Toole / Elizabeth Gudgeon vs Peg Hopkins / Anne Bergin7-6, 1-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesLori Vardas / Susan Lant vs Kathleen Worley / Joy Mullady4-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Gudgeon / Jill Kenney vs Lori Edwards / Kimberly Jesseman2-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesTracey Rubach vs Ella Lord3-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesKelley OBrien / J Mosca vs Laura Dofitas / Christine Esler7-6, 0-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesElizabeth O'Toole / Reda Cepulenaite vs Elisa Boyd / Emily Lund5-7, 2-6
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Gudgeon / Salve Messina vs Martha Skryd / Kem Jennings4-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKelley OBrien / Susan Korn vs Suzi Feliciano / Priya Bansal7-6, 2-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesReda Cepulenaite / Elizabeth O'Toole vs Sheri Holt / Leslie Noel4-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#1 DoublesTracey Rubach / Salve Messina vs Joy Mullady / Catherine Wasylenko6-7, 4-6
W#2 DoublesLyn Reed / Cheryl Engle vs Anne Bergin / Cathy Abbott6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Gudgeon / Lori Vardas vs Menorah McCarty / Sheila Naylor6-2, 1-6, 1-0
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Gudgeon / Jill Kenney vs Linda Ludwig / Janine Stalcup1-6, 6-7
W#1 SinglesKelly Coyle vs Donna Heinrich6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesLori Vardas / Kelley OBrien vs Elisa Boyd / Karen McClure6-3, 2-6, 1-0
L#1 DoublesJ Mosca / Tracey Rubach vs Suzi Feliciano / Cindy Monahan4-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesKelly Coyle vs Cochita Jose6-4, 6-0
L#2 DoublesSusan Lant / Julie Comey vs Kem Jennings / Lisa Simotes4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesLori Vardas / Reda Cepulenaite vs Priya Bansal / Larisa Adamian4-6, 6-5, 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 standings for NITA Summer Adult 40 & Over 3.5 Women have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.02 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.

J Mosca
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.18
Cheryl Engle
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.18
Lyn Reed
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.14
Jill Kenney
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.12
Lori Vardas
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.00
Elizabeth Gudgeon
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.00
Reda Cepulenaite
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.81
Tracey Rubach
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3
Courtney Wade
published 3
2.72
Elizabeth O'Toole
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Julie Comey
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kelley OBrien
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kelly Coyle
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Salve Messina
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Korn
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Lant
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 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.

Julie Comey + J Mosca1839% games+1.9% vs expected
Julie Comey + Tracey Rubach6650% games−1.9% vs expected
Lori Vardas + Reda Cepulenaite4644% games−2.0% vs expected
Jill Kenney + Elizabeth Gudgeon3448% games−3.8% vs expected
Kelley OBrien + Tracey Rubach3548% games−4.3% vs expected
Tracey Rubach + J Mosca0934% games−10.6% vs expected
Tracey Rubach + Salve Messina3447% gamesnot enough data
Elizabeth Gudgeon + Kelley OBrien0535% 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.

3.5
J Mosca
27W–63L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Cheryl Engle
97W–122L career · 2 lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.18
Lyn Reed
141W–150L career · 2 lines in 2022
9%91%1%
3.18
Jill Kenney
30W–43L career · 2 lines in 2022
14%86%<1%
3.14
3.5
Lori Vardas
164W–120L career · 4 lines in 2022
17%82%<1%
3.12
3.5
Elizabeth Gudgeon
45W–75L career · 5 lines in 2022
51%49%<1%
3.00
Reda Cepulenaite
78W–55L career · 3 lines in 2022
51%49%<1%
3.00
3
Tracey Rubach
81W–141L career · 3 lines in 2022
1%92%7%
2.81
3
Courtney Wade
4W–6L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Elizabeth O'Toole
16W–59L career · 3 lines in 2022
5%94%2%
2.72
Julie Comey
35W–49L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Kelley OBrien
33W–55L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Kelly Coyle
16W–4L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Salve Messina
37W–36L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Korn
11W–28L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Susan Lant
0W–2L 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.