Teams

C 6.5W TRR Gayer

2025 NEOTA Combo · NEOTA 6.5 Combo Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.17 / NORTHEASTERN OHIO

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 →
Schedule4 played
2025-11-09vs C 6.5W AO2 PeckoLost 12
W#1 DoublesMary Stenger / Dana Miller vs Courtney Harrigan / Krystal Massey2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJamisen Newman / Ashley Przybylski vs Kate Prendes / Shannon Carey7-6, 1-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesSamantha Mansour / Rebecca Dworakowski vs Paula Pecko / Sandra Neustadtl7-5, 4-6, 0-1
2025-10-26vs C 6.5W KI TrivisonnoSplit 11
L#1 DoublesJamisen Newman / Mary Stenger vs Lynda Brandal / Nikki Trivisonno4-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Gayer / Sarah Ginn vs Sara Schaefer / Eileen Linz6-4, 7-5
2025-10-04vs C 6.5W AO2 PeckoLost 12
W#1 DoublesDana Miller / Mary Stenger vs Leigha St. George / Jennifer Glass7-6, 1-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesPamela Fleischer / Hannah Mullee vs Amy Grace / Julie Spintzyk4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesKristen Hrusch / Claudia Lewis vs Kristen Boll / Linda Bates4-6, 3-6
2025-09-21vs C 6.5W KI TrivisonnoLost 03
L#1 DoublesKirsten Oravec / Rebecca Dworakowski vs Kate Biggar / Abigail T.1-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesSarah Ginn / Elizabeth Gayer vs Nikki Trivisonno / Libby Freeman4-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesSamantha Mansour / Claudia Lewis vs Meghan Walsh / Sara Schaefer6-4, 3-6, 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 NEOTA 6.5 Combo 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 2.88 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.

3.29
Hannah Mullee
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.08
Mary Stenger
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.04
Sarah Ginn
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.96
Elizabeth Gayer
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.95
Jamisen Newman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.89
Samantha Mansour
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Claudia Lewis
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.74
Rebecca Dworakowski
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published
2.74
Pamela Fleischer
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.74
Kristen Hrusch
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.69
Ivana Coughlin
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.60
Ashley Przybylski
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Kirsten Oravec
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Elizabeth Gayer + Sarah Ginn13267% games+16.1% vs expected
Elizabeth Gayer + Rebecca Dworakowski4449% games+7.5% vs expected
Rebecca Dworakowski + Samantha Mansour6354% games+7.3% vs expected
Rebecca Dworakowski + Pamela Fleischer1437% gamesnot enough data
Claudia Lewis + Kristen Hrusch224 matchesnot enough data
Elizabeth Gayer + Kristen Hrusch224 matchesnot enough data
Elizabeth Gayer + Pamela Fleischer314 matchesnot enough data
Rebecca Dworakowski + Ivana Coughlin314 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
Hannah Mullee
15W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
1%94%5%
3.29
Mary Stenger
13W–41L career · 3 lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.08
Sarah Ginn
27W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%39%61%
3.04
3
Elizabeth Gayer
33W–22L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%62%38%
2.96
3.5
Jamisen Newman
1W–9L career · type S · 2 lines in 2025
66%34%<1%
2.95
Samantha Mansour
22W–25L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%80%20%
2.89
3
Claudia Lewis
12W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Rebecca Dworakowski
49W–35L career · 6 lines in 2025
3%95%2%
2.74
Pamela Fleischer
14W–22L career · 1 line in 2025
3%95%2%
2.74
Kristen Hrusch
20W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
3%94%2%
2.74
3
Ivana Coughlin
16W–14L career · 4 lines in 2025
7%92%1%
2.69
3
Ashley Przybylski
3W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
23%77%<1%
2.60
Kirsten Oravec
4W–6L career · 1 line 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.