Teams

NITA E 40W40i Five Star (Yaeger/Young)

2023 NITA1 ESL Adult 40 & Over · NITA ESL 40 & Over 4.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.68 / 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 DoublesTeri Andersen / Martha Skryd vs Colleen Stover / Michele Muchmore7-6, 1-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesAlicia Yaeger vs Tracie Wilcox1-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 DoublesLori Toney / Michelle Dougherty vs Angela Lukas / Margaret Chung2-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesTeri Andersen / Michelle Dougherty vs Cindy Bielik / Carlene Motto0-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesCheryl Engle vs Jean Ma3-6, 3-5
2022-11-04vs NITA E 40W40b Rush Copley (Adams)Lost 13
L#1 DoublesLori Toney / Teri Andersen vs Soraya McTeague / Cindy Sullivan3-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesDenise Rippetoe-Reed vs Kristy Sweigard0-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesDorothy OMalley / Martha Skryd vs Susan Johnson / Michelle Reynolds6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesMinja Baek-Jones / Sue Keough vs Palida Jameson / Andrea Church0-6, 0-6
L#1 DoublesDorothy OMalley / Amy Harper vs Dawn Baumann / Martha Davis5-7, 3-6
L#1 SinglesDenise Rippetoe-Reed vs Teodora Varcheva3-6, 4-5
W#2 DoublesLori Toney / Alicia Yaeger vs Julie Weidner / Kate Newman7-6, 2-3, 1-0
L#1 DoublesLori Toney / Dorothy OMalley vs Keli Redinger / Pauline Tuchscherer1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesTeri Andersen / Michelle Dougherty vs Jackie Smith / Louise Burnison1-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesCheryl Engle / Karen Jackson vs Ying Zhang / Anna MacAtangay1-6, 1-6
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 standings9 teams · NITA ESL 40 & Over 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA E 40W40b Rush Copley (Adams)7124822212
2NITA E 40W40e Racquet Club LB (Geary)71211128230
3NITA E 40W40f Score (Bianchi/Knutte)62191328229
4NITA E 40W40c Centre Court AC (Ricchio/Brambora)44171533242
5NITA E 40W40a TAM (Lobo-Corey/Varcheva)44161637286
6NITA E 40W40d Oak Brook TC (Lukas/Cushing)35181432273
7NITA E 40W40g Hinsdale RC (Scrogin/Hennessey)35141841276
8NITA E 40W40h Courts Plus (Barsotti)26131940296
9NITA E 40W40i Five Star (Yaeger/Young)0823061373

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 3.34 estimated across 11 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.

3.60
Dorothy OMalley
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.50
Martha Skryd
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.41
Christy McGovern
published 4
3.40
Lori Toney
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.37
Denise Rippetoe-Reed
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.37
Alicia Yaeger
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.32
Sue Keough
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Amy Harper
published 3.5
3.24
Teri Andersen
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.21
Michelle Dougherty
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.18
Minja Baek-Jones
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.18
Cheryl Engle
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
Karen Jackson
published
Rhonda Williams
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.

Dorothy OMalley + Martha Skryd8851% games+3.0% vs expected
Martha Skryd + Sue Keough4746% games−1.1% vs expected
Dorothy OMalley + Michelle Dougherty4547% games−1.4% vs expected
Dorothy OMalley + Alicia Yaeger92342% games−1.5% vs expected
Teri Andersen + Martha Skryd2833% games−3.4% vs expected
Minja Baek-Jones + Lori Toney10453% games−4.0% vs expected
Martha Skryd + Lori Toney3444% games−4.7% vs expected
Alicia Yaeger + Amy Harper1542% games−7.2% vs expected
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
Dorothy OMalley
173W–204L career · 3 lines in 2023
22%78%<1%
3.60
4
Martha Skryd
87W–123L career · 2 lines in 2023
50%50%<1%
3.50
4
Christy McGovern
20W–22L career · no lines in 2023
75%25%<1%
3.41
3.5
Lori Toney
129W–74L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
3.40
3.5
Denise Rippetoe-Reed
179W–233L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%84%16%
3.37
4
Alicia Yaeger
51W–115L career · 4 lines in 2023
85%15%<1%
3.37
3.5
Sue Keough
57W–110L career · 1 line in 2023
1%91%8%
3.32
3.5
Amy Harper
29W–50L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
3.5
Teri Andersen
35W–84L career · 4 lines in 2023
3%94%2%
3.24
Michelle Dougherty
31W–63L career · 3 lines in 2023
6%93%1%
3.21
3.5
Minja Baek-Jones
74W–93L career · 4 lines in 2023
8%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Cheryl Engle
97W–122L career · 6 lines in 2023
8%91%1%
3.18
Karen Jackson
23W–47L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Rhonda Williams
17W–26L career · no 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.