Teams

4S:Net Results:Giff

2025 SCT Tri-Level Women's 3.0-5.0 · 3.0 Women's Tri-Level 1

4 players · average NTRP 3.00 / SOUTHERN CONNECTICUT

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
2025-11-15vs MRC:3.0 Tri Level:VittiLost 01
L#1 DoublesKim Biltoft / Tracy Haddad vs Jill Vitti / Erin Benvegnu3-6, 1-6
2025-11-11vs MIT:Tri 3.0 W:GregoLost 01
L#1 DoublesKim Biltoft / Tracy Haddad vs Jill Grego / Cassandra Etter6-7, 1-6
W#1 DoublesKim Biltoft / Tracy Haddad vs Heather Nelson / Yumiko Hawke6-2, 7-5
2025-10-19vs TCT:The Game Changers:SchoffstallWon 10
W#1 DoublesLynn Broder / Catherine Giff vs Ali Cordova / Kathleen Dowd6-2, 7-6
2025-10-18vs MRC:3.0 Tri Level:VittiWon 10
W#1 DoublesKim Biltoft / Lynn Broder vs Hiam Asmar / Jill Vitti6-1, 6-4
2025-09-28vs TCT:Truth or Dare Doubles:EspositoLost 01
L#1 DoublesKim Biltoft / Tracy Haddad vs Leah Esposito / Ellen Lewis4-6, 2-6
2025-09-23vs MIT:Tri 3.0 W:GregoWon 10
W#1 DoublesKim Biltoft / Tracy Haddad vs Jill Grego / Cassandra Etter7-6, 6-2
2025-09-08vs TCT:The Game Changers:SchoffstallWon 10
W#1 DoublesLynn Broder / Catherine Giff vs Tara Schoffstall / Christine Kay6-2, 6-1
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 standings5 teams · 3.0 Women's Tri-Level 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1TCT:The Game Changers:Schoffstall#000000
2MRC:3.0 Tri Level:Vitti0651348
34S:Net Results:Giff0633657
4TCT:Truth or Dare Doubles:Esposito0624857
5MIT:Tri 3.0 W:Grego0624961

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 2.80 estimated across 4 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.

3.00
Lynn Broder
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.86
Kim Biltoft
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.74
Tracy Haddad
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.61
Catherine Giff
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
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.

Lynn Broder + Kim Biltoft6163% games+13.1% vs expected
Lynn Broder + Catherine Giff5354% games+8.8% vs expected
Tracy Haddad + Kim Biltoft8754% games−0.2% vs expected
Catherine Giff + Tracy Haddad224 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.

Lynn Broder
31W–13L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%49%51%
3.00
Kim Biltoft
42W–36L career · 6 lines in 2025
1%84%16%
2.86
Tracy Haddad
61W–47L career · 5 lines in 2025
4%92%3%
2.74
3
Catherine Giff
114W–98L career · 2 lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
2.61

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.