Teams

Idaho/Bigelow/55&Over9.0W

2022 USTA ADULT 55 and OVER - BOISE · TV

10 players · average NTRP 4.30 / IDAHO

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 →
Schedule6 played
2022-08-07vs UdahoWon 10
W#3 DoublesHeidi Mickelson / Sarah Halvorson vs Melanie Smith / Kathy Miller-Rees2-6, 6-2, 1-0
2022-08-07vs Glamour SlammersWon 10
W#3 DoublesHanna Bigelow / Michelle Sabina vs Debbie Wachtell / Carmen Little2-6, 7-6, 1-0
2022-08-06Won 10
W#1 DoublesHanna Bigelow / Michelle Sabina vs Jane McQuade / Ann Phillips6-4, 6-2
2022-08-06Won 20
W#1 DoublesHanna Bigelow / Sarah Halvorson vs Becky Caven / Lisa Diehr6-4, 6-1
W#3 DoublesCarol Gullstad / Heidi Mickelson vs Beth Calvo / Denise Shawver6-4, 6-3
2022-08-05vs Glamour SlammersLost 02
L#2 DoublesMichelle Sabina / Karen van Arsdale vs Debbie Wachtell / Carmen Little3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesHeidi Mickelson / Bonnie Larsen vs Jo Ann Kurz / Pamela Alexander4-6, 3-6
2022-08-05Won 10
W#3 DoublesHanna Bigelow / Sarah Halvorson vs Terry Hardy / Karen Mangum6-0, 6-3
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 · TV
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Idaho/Bigelow/55&Over9.0W4214413155
2Glamour Slammers4210818154
3Udaho4211718151
4Hard Hitters 9.00611735202

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 4.05 estimated across 2 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.

Elise Orban
published 4.5
Shannon Dilorenzo
published 4.5
4.19
Mary Gustafson
published
3.91
Hanna Bigelow
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
Heidi Mickelson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
Kristin Miller
published 4
Alma Mills
published
Christine Mangham
published
Michelle Sabina
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Sue Hamilton
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.

Shannon Dilorenzo + Elise Orban17561% games+7.5% 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.

4.5
Elise Orban
71W–37L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
4.5
Shannon Dilorenzo
53W–26L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Mary Gustafson
44W–27L career · no lines in 2022
8%92%1%
4.19
4.5
Hanna Bigelow
11W–22L career · 4 lines in 2022
75%25%<1%
3.91
4
Heidi Mickelson
4W–7L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Kristin Miller
34W–9L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Alma Mills
1W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Christine Mangham
8W–5L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Michelle Sabina
4W–1L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sue Hamilton
2W–1L career · no 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.