Teams

Pennsbury Tricksters 4.5

Adult Tri-Level League · Tri Level NI Women Wed 4.5

17 players · average NTRP 4.06 / PHILADELPHIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2023-11-01vs Frog Hollow TriWon 20
W#1 DoublesKimberly Santerian / Katerina Saskova vs Judy Booth / Rachel Lebiedzinski6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesLeslye Rush / Dana Ramos-Rivera vs Mauri Johnson / Carla Kotik6-3, 5-2
2023-10-25vs Hot ShotsWon 21
L#1 DoublesKimberly Santerian / Kelly Erickson vs Chrissy Schuck / Lisa Sheldon5-7, 0-6
W#2 DoublesMichele Kiszely / Karen James vs Lori Messina / Bridget Hallman1-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLeslye Rush / Kristin Minter vs Karen Reaume / Amanda Neill7-5, 6-5
2023-10-11vs Frog Hollow TriWon 30
W#1 DoublesLisa Sztejman / Vail Lavino vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesSamantha Kanarek / Kathleen Fabbri vs Toni Hamlett / Debra Lorah6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesLeslye Rush / Stephanie Bissol vs LAURA KING / Sunny HASSETT7-5, 6-1
2023-10-04vs Hot ShotsWon 21
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Favia / Vail Lavino vs Chrissy Schuck / Amanda Chauhan6-1, 4-3
W#2 DoublesShara Aaron / Ann Fisher vs Lori Messina / Lisa Sheldon6-2, 5-3
L#3 DoublesLeslye Rush / Stephanie Bissol vs Kathleen Bergen / Amy Orcutt2-6, 1-6
2023-09-20vs Frog Hollow TriWon 21
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Favia / Betsy Ricker vs Cary Leung / Kumhui Feindler2-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesSamantha Kanarek / Shara Aaron vs Cindy Chung / Rachel Lebiedzinski4-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLeslye Rush / Dana Ramos-Rivera vs LAURA KING / Sunny HASSETT4-6, 7-5, 1-0
2023-09-13vs Hot ShotsLost 03
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Favia / Betsy Ricker vs Chrissy Schuck / Marycate McDonough4-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#2 DoublesKathleen Fabbri / Samantha Kanarek vs Lori Messina / Lisa Sheldon6-7, 2-5
L#3 DoublesLeslye Rush / Dana Ramos-Rivera vs Karen Reaume / Amanda Neill3-6, 3-6
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 standings2 teams · Tri Level NI Women Wed 4.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Pennsbury Tricksters 4.55112615141
2Frog Hollow Tri1541426192

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 3.92 estimated across 14 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.

4.42
Katerina Saskova
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.29
Michele Kiszely
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Ann Fisher
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.22
Betsy Ricker
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.19
Shara Aaron
usually #1 Doubles 85%, also #2 Doubles 15% · published
4.13
Lisa Sztejman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.10
Suzanne Favia
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.07
Vail Lavino
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.05
Kimberly Santerian
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.93
Samantha Kanarek
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.73
Kathleen Fabbri
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.73
Karen James
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.51
Stephanie Bissol
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.35
Kristin Minter
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.18
Dana Ramos-Rivera
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Kelly Erickson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Leslye Rush
usually #3 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.

Leslye Rush + Kathleen Fabbri15554% games+7.0% vs expected
Michele Kiszely + Katerina Saskova17360% games+6.2% vs expected
Ann Fisher + Shara Aaron18658% games+2.8% vs expected
Michele Kiszely + Karen James341355% games+1.2% vs expected
Lisa Sztejman + Vail Lavino13853% games−0.3% vs expected
Kathleen Fabbri + Samantha Kanarek2349% games−0.5% vs expected
Kimberly Santerian + Shara Aaron5162% games−0.6% vs expected
Michele Kiszely + Suzanne Favia4352% games−0.8% 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.

Katerina Saskova
37W–6L career · 1 line in 2023
<1%72%28%
4.42
Michele Kiszely
104W–57L career · 2 lines in 2023
1%94%5%
4.29
4.5
Ann Fisher
33W–17L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
4.5
Betsy Ricker
84W–43L career · 2 lines in 2023
4%94%2%
4.22
Shara Aaron
114W–56L career · 13 lines in 2023
8%92%1%
4.19
4.5
Lisa Sztejman
59W–53L career · 1 line in 2023
15%85%<1%
4.13
4.5
Suzanne Favia
198W–131L career · 3 lines in 2023
23%77%<1%
4.10
Vail Lavino
43W–24L career · 1 line in 2023
29%71%<1%
4.07
Kimberly Santerian
56W–30L career · 2 lines in 2023
34%66%<1%
4.05
4
Samantha Kanarek
228W–77L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%71%29%
3.93
Kathleen Fabbri
80W–55L career · 4 lines in 2023
4%94%2%
3.73
Karen James
98W–65L career · 2 lines in 2023
4%94%2%
3.73
3.5
Stephanie Bissol
106W–50L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%46%54%
3.51
3.5
Kristin Minter
71W–55L career · 1 line in 2023
<1%88%12%
3.35
3.5
Dana Ramos-Rivera
129W–169L career · 3 lines in 2023
8%91%1%
3.18
Kelly Erickson
12W–15L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Leslye Rush
59W–40L career · 6 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.