Teams

Jorgensen

2024 Neb. Adult 18&Over Tri-Level 3.5-4.5 · 3.5-4.5 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.75 / NEBRASKA

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 →
Schedule7 played
2024-09-25vs BanksSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMelissa Darling / Nicolette Diamantis vs Kay Merkel / Becky Svatora2-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesKim Foral / Shellyn Sands vs Heather Siebken / Courtney West6-2, 6-2
2024-09-11vs BourlandLost 12
L#1 DoublesMelissa Darling / Nicolette Diamantis vs Kristen Paulmeyer / Mallory Pole2-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesJennifer Lindner / Stephanie Johnson vs Katie Cordery / Jillian Bateman7-6, 6-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesBeth Kramer / Shellyn Sands vs Alice Blake / Meredith Weitz0-6, 6-7
2024-09-04vs NE/Allison/Mid-TriWLost 03
L#1 DoublesTory Jorgensen / Melissa Darling vs Brittni Redding / Donna Wyse3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesStephanie Johnson / Karen Jennings vs Rachel Southard / Rachel Miller4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesShellyn Sands / Kim Foral vs Molly Hunt-Spisak / Kimberly Nastase4-6, 2-6
2024-08-28vs GradovilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesMelissa Darling / Nicolette Diamantis vs Shannon Dombrowski / Amanda Caven4-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#2 DoublesVictoria Leigh Glesmann / Jo Lehan vs Kendra McGinnis / Heather Blumel6-3, 6-3
L#3 DoublesSusan Toohey / Yasuko Wakuzawa vs Kasey Hesse / Kim Tracy0-6, 1-6
2024-08-14vs HazelriggWon 21
W#1 DoublesTory Jorgensen / Jennifer Lindner vs Noelle Wegiel / Katie Mendlick6-3, 6-2
L#2 DoublesKaren Jennings / Jo Lehan vs Holly Christoffels / Denise Hazelrigg2-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesKim Foral / Beth Kramer vs Amanda Blumkin / Amanda Dana6-3, 6-4
2024-08-07vs Tong/ZebrowskiLost 12
L#1 DoublesTory Jorgensen / Jennifer Lindner vs Allyah Rayyan / Jennifer Zientarski0-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesJo Lehan / Karen Jennings vs Kelli Fitzgerald Draper / Teri Barnard6-3, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSusan Toohey / Yasuko Wakuzawa vs Jennifer Christensen / Melissa Hass1-6, 3-6
2022-08-10vs BourlandLost 02
L#1 DoublesJennifer Lindner / Anastasia Kyvelidou vs Alexa Obermier / Breanna Obermier6-1, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesSusan Toohey / Molly Hunt-Spisak vs Brandi Goldapp / Robyn Kleidosty2-6, 6-2, 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 standings10 teams · 3.5-4.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NE/Allison/Mid-TriW511449114
2Banks5111715141
3Bourland4212613147
4Tegler4210817151
5Wain4211719160
6Gradoville2481023169
7Tong/Zebrowski2471124179
8Hazelrigg2451328185
9Jorgensen1561226186
10Mandigo1561226181

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 3.31 estimated across 9 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.

3.76
Jo Lehan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Diane Porter
published 4
3.58
Melissa Darling
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.48
Jennifer Lindner
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.39
Tory Jorgensen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.34
Victoria Leigh Glesmann
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.23
Kim Foral
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.08
Nicolette Diamantis
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.07
Beth Kramer
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.89
Shellyn Sands
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Karen Jennings
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Toohey
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Yasuko Wakuzawa
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.

Nicolette Diamantis + Melissa Darling81248% games+5.1% vs expected
Tory Jorgensen + Diane Porter11955% games−0.4% vs expected
Nicolette Diamantis + Jo Lehan3345% games−4.6% vs expected
Tory Jorgensen + Jennifer Lindner2443% games−5.0% vs expected
Tory Jorgensen + Jo Lehan4448% games−9.1% vs expected
Yasuko Wakuzawa + Susan Toohey044 matchesnot enough data
Nicolette Diamantis + Tory Jorgensen314 matchesnot enough data
Nicolette Diamantis + Karen Jennings224 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.

Jo Lehan
87W–64L career · 3 lines in 2024
3%92%4%
3.76
4
Diane Porter
42W–31L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Melissa Darling
30W–31L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%29%71%
3.58
Jennifer Lindner
55W–52L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%<1%>99%
3.48
Tory Jorgensen
98W–75L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%77%22%
3.39
Victoria Leigh Glesmann
35W–46L career · 1 line in 2024
1%86%13%
3.34
Kim Foral
37W–32L career · 3 lines in 2024
5%92%3%
3.23
Nicolette Diamantis
46W–83L career · 3 lines in 2024
28%71%<1%
3.08
3.5
Beth Kramer
29W–31L career · 2 lines in 2024
31%69%<1%
3.07
Shellyn Sands
50W–73L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%78%22%
2.89
Karen Jennings
15W–23L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Susan Toohey
20W–41L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Yasuko Wakuzawa
16W–18L career · 2 lines in 2024
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.