Teams

MCAC:SummerLVs:White:Harris

2025 Cape Adult 55 & Over Women · 7.0 Women 1

14 players · average NTRP 3.50 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2025-08-11vs MCAC:Swansey:SwanseySplit 11
L#2 DoublesMary Crawford / STACY REINHART vs Susan Dean / Deanna Waldron6-1, 6-7, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJane Blaser / Linda Sullivan vs Jolette Westbrook / Pamela Alden6-1, 6-5
L#1 DoublesKim Sullivan / STACY REINHART vs Maureen McAdqms / Kathryn Green4-6, 5-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesLinda Cronin / Mary Crawford vs Jeannine Maguire / Tina Mosca7-5, 3-6, 1-0
2025-07-28vs MCAC:Hoagland:HoaglandLost 01
L#2 DoublesMary Crawford / Jane Blaser vs Kathleen Lewis / Amy Peacock2-6, 4-5
2025-07-14vs MCAC:Swansey:SwanseyLost 12
W#1 DoublesSTACY REINHART / Kim Sullivan vs Jean McCutcheon / Sandra Taylor-Vose7-5, 2-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMarjorie White / Jane Blaser vs Gemma Jones / Laurel Fairweather3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesLinda Cronin / Patricia Cronin vs Pamela Alden / Lisa Swansey4-6, 3-5
W#2 DoublesPaula Casey / STACY REINHART vs Elizabeth Beckhardt / Liz Anderson6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMary Crawford / Linda Sullivan vs Diane Arena / Mary Lou Jackson6-1, 6-1
2025-06-16vs MCAC:Hoagland:HoaglandWon 20
W#2 DoublesPaula Casey / STACY REINHART vs Kathleen Lewis / Cheryl Vozzella6-3, 5-4
W#3 DoublesLinda Cronin / Mary Crawford vs Laurie Murphy / Elizabeth Horan7-6, 4-5, 1-0
2025-06-02vs MCAC:Capers:SwanseyWon 10
W#3 DoublesJane Blaser / Mary Crawford vs Jean McCutcheon / Pamela Alden6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesPaula Casey / STACY REINHART vs Allyson Felix / Tina Mosca6-0, 7-5
W#3 DoublesLinda Cronin / Patricia Cronin vs Elizabeth Beckhardt / Cindy Sia6-1, 6-1
2025-05-05vs MCAC:Hoagland:HoaglandWon 20
W#2 DoublesKim Sullivan / STACY REINHART vs Elizabeth Doriss / Cheryl Vozzella6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesLinda Cronin / Mary Crawford vs Deborah Evans / Jeannette Cooper6-2, 6-2
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 standings4 teams · 7.0 Women 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MCAC:Capers:Swansey81171029228
2MCAC:TrueBlues:Hoaglund54161125205
3MCAC:SummerLVs:White:Harris45141331221
4MCAC:TennisTitans:Mosca:Felix:Hayes1872045287

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 3.15 estimated across 7 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.

3.37
Mary Crawford
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.23
Emily Kissell
usually #1 Doubles 82%, also #2 Doubles 9% · published 3.5
3.21
Ellen Harris
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
3.07
STACY REINHART
usually #2 Doubles 71%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
3.06
Linda Cronin
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.06
Marjorie White
usually #1 Doubles 88%, also #2 Doubles 6% · published
3.06
Laura Leveille
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Jane Blaser
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Kim Sullivan
published
Linda Sullivan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Marilou Barsam
published
Patricia Cronin
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
Paula Casey
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Tracey Gardella
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.

Ellen Harris + Marjorie White212248% games+0.6% vs expected
Emily Kissell + Marjorie White191554% games−0.4% vs expected
Paula Casey + Ellen Harris2639% games−9.4% vs expected
Patricia Cronin + Paula Casey141055% gamesnot enough data
Mary Crawford + Linda Cronin6552% gamesnot enough data
Jane Blaser + Mary Crawford4260% gamesnot enough data
Mary Crawford + Laura Leveille4262% gamesnot enough data
Emily Kissell + Paula Casey314 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.

Mary Crawford
34W–26L career · 12 lines in 2025
<1%85%15%
3.37
3.5
Emily Kissell
49W–29L career · 11 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.23
3.5
Ellen Harris
93W–73L career · 7 lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.21
STACY REINHART
26W–21L career · 7 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.07
Linda Cronin
14W–15L career · 5 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.06
Marjorie White
125W–152L career · 16 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.06
Laura Leveille
54W–49L career · 5 lines in 2025
32%67%<1%
3.06
Jane Blaser
10W–11L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kim Sullivan
22W–16L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Linda Sullivan
24W–38L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Marilou Barsam
3W–16L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Patricia Cronin
47W–39L career · 6 lines in 2025
not enough data
Paula Casey
64W–75L career · 8 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tracey Gardella
15W–12L career · no lines in 2025
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.