Teams

Olympic Ellis

2023 SUMMER 65&O Women · Summer 8.0W

11 players · average NTRP 3.38 / OHIO VALLEY

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 →
Schedule3 played
2023-06-16vs Olympic LucasLost 01
L#2 DoublesLinda McBride / Cynthia Pawlarczyk vs Lori Brown / Leanna Cempre2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2023-06-09vs Olympic LucasLost 01
L#2 DoublesLinda McBride / Susan Steffen vs Mary Drennen / Martha Pfeifer7-6, 2-6, 0-1
2023-05-19vs Olympic LucasLost 01
L#2 DoublesLinda McBride / Cynthia Pawlarczyk vs Leanna Cempre / Rebecca Long2-6, 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 standings2 teams · Summer 8.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Olympic Lucas50123876
2Olympic Ellis0531226169

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 3.16 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.

3.50
Alisa Sagar
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.36
Deborah Ellis
usually #2 Doubles 42%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.36
Mary Anne Acer
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Barbara Koch
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.11
Karen Heyob
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
2.89
Cynthia Pawlarczyk
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3
2.72
Sarah Lukach
usually #3 Doubles 63%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Karen Sampson
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Linda McBride
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Lisa Westwater
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Susan Steffen
usually #2 Doubles 63%, also #3 Doubles 25% · 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.

Mary Anne Acer + Deborah Ellis36763% games+5.8% vs expected
Mary Anne Acer + Linda McBride5452% games−3.8% vs expected
Mary Anne Acer + Susan Steffen5461% gamesnot enough data
Mary Anne Acer + Karen Heyob4454% gamesnot enough data
Susan Steffen + Deborah Ellis4353% gamesnot enough data
Sarah Lukach + Cynthia Pawlarczyk2438% gamesnot enough data
Susan Steffen + Linda McBride2353% gamesnot enough data
Barbara Koch + Susan Steffen134 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
Alisa Sagar
95W–138L career · 6 lines in 2023
<1%51%49%
3.50
3.5
Deborah Ellis
247W–121L career · 12 lines in 2023
<1%85%15%
3.36
Mary Anne Acer
145W–110L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%86%14%
3.36
3.5
Barbara Koch
19W–25L career · type S · 6 lines in 2023
not enough data
Karen Heyob
118W–99L career · 5 lines in 2023
19%80%<1%
3.11
3
Cynthia Pawlarczyk
151W–208L career · 8 lines in 2023
<1%80%20%
2.89
Sarah Lukach
53W–76L career · 8 lines in 2023
4%94%2%
2.72
Karen Sampson
36W–49L career · 5 lines in 2023
not enough data
Linda McBride
23W–58L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Lisa Westwater
22W–8L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Susan Steffen
66W–55L career · 8 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.