Teams

CED:Cedardale Aces:Packard/Moore

2022 EMA Adult 18 & Over Women · 2.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 2.90 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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 →
Schedule8 played
W#1 SinglesSonja Murphy vs LENORE DELAINE6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesJulie Valenti / Lydia Nugent vs Elizabeth Fontaine / Cameron DeMarche7-5, 6-1
2022-07-07vs CED:Cedardale Blue:Mintz/MooreWon 30
W#1 DoublesAnastasia Packard / Sonja Murphy vs Kellie Fernald / Cynthia Burns6-3, 6-0
W#1 SinglesShirley Ciccolo vs Shachenka Downs6-2, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesChong Treitel / Denise Galvin vs Rachel Mintz / Denise Flaherty6-3, 6-4
W#1 DoublesDenise Galvin / Chong Treitel vs Kristen Luongo / Nicole Guilmartin6-4, 6-3
W#1 SinglesShirley Ciccolo vs Shelley Penna6-1, 6-0
L#2 DoublesJulie Valenti / Robyn Kotarski vs Tiana Rick / Holly Tomes3-6, 4-6
2022-06-16vs SFT:Spark F&T:SidemanWon 20
W#1 DoublesChong Treitel / Denise Galvin vs Katie Grimes / Maureen Kacvinsky6-1, 6-2
W#1 SinglesSonja Murphy vs Lori Johnson7-6, 5-3, 1-0
W#1 DoublesChong Treitel / Denise Galvin vs Donna Robinson / Tracey Lanoue4-6, 6-0, 1-0
W#1 SinglesShirley Ciccolo vs Amy Young6-0, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAnastasia Packard / Brenda Rugg vs Karen Leggett / Elizabeth Fontaine6-1, 6-1
2022-06-02vs CED:Cedardale Blue:Mintz/MooreSplit 11
L#1 SinglesSonja Murphy vs Shachenka Downs3-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesBrenda Rugg / Shirley Ciccolo vs Kristen Tingle / Kellie Fernald6-1, 6-2
W#1 DoublesChong Treitel / Denise Galvin vs Caitlin Doran-Serafino / Shelley Penna6-2, 6-3
L#1 SinglesAnastasia Packard vs Carolyn Sheehy3-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesBrenda Rugg / Robyn Kotarski vs Holly Tomes / Tiana Rick6-0, 6-4
2022-05-12vs SFT:Spark F&T:SidemanLost 12
L#1 DoublesSonja Murphy / Shirley Ciccolo vs Maureen Kacvinsky / Kate Lambert1-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#1 SinglesBrenda Rugg vs Valerie Arsenault6-1, 6-0
L#2 DoublesJanice Adie / Lydia Nugent vs Noelle Statires / Taylor Sullivan1-6, 2-6
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 standings16 teams · 2.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1LFW:Lobettes:Swartz0610715128
2WIG:Wightman Volley Girls:Walsh0671022168
3CED:Cedardale Aces:Packard/Moore0816818162
4BRTC:Bass River Green:Graham/Thomas0815922200
5CED:Cedardale Blue:Mintz/Moore08101429222
6CED:Cedardale Red:Chapman/Adamonis0891535265
7BRTC:Bass River White:Dinsmore092525117
8BRTC:Bass River Black:Bulger/Curtin0921616168
9SSY:South Shore:Mendoza/Ford0919818189
10BRTC:Bass River Red:Mancuso09141328230
11SRF:Scituate:Horne09151229239
12BRTC:Bass River Blue:Boehning/Sweetland09141332265
13COH:Cohasset:Higgins/Matheos09111638261
14BRCC:Black Rock:Troyer/O'Brien0991841280
15BRTC:Bass River Yellow:Bremer/Fiore0962145283
16FCC:Ferncroft CC 2:Cirolo0912652321

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 2.61 estimated across 6 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.

Heather Moore
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.98
Shirley Ciccolo
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
2.80
Brenda Rugg
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3
2.78
Anastasia Packard
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.42
Lydia Nugent
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.39
Denise Galvin
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 2.5
2.26
Chong Treitel
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 2.5
Julie Valenti
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Robyn Kotarski
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Sonja Murphy
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #1 Singles 27% · 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.

Brenda Rugg + Shirley Ciccolo8165% games+5.7% vs expected
Chong Treitel + Denise Galvin7851% games+2.1% vs expected
Chong Treitel + Julie Valenti1435% gamesnot enough data
Julie Valenti + Lydia Nugent213 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
Heather Moore
21W–24L career · 6 lines in 2022
not enough data
Shirley Ciccolo
35W–17L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%55%44%
2.98
3
Brenda Rugg
37W–22L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
2.80
3
Anastasia Packard
14W–19L career · 3 lines in 2022
1%94%5%
2.78
Lydia Nugent
14W–17L career · 2 lines in 2022
0%72%28%
2.42
2.5
Denise Galvin
12W–12L career · 5 lines in 2022
0%81%19%
2.39
2.5
Chong Treitel
9W–19L career · 5 lines in 2022
0%97%3%
2.26
Julie Valenti
7W–11L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Robyn Kotarski
11W–7L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sonja Murphy
19W–12L career · 10 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.