Teams

CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W Glenbrook Turdo Sun 3 $25

CDTA ESL 18 & Over W · E

10 players · average NTRP 3.43 / CHICAGO

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 →
Schedule1 played
2021-10-03Lost 02
L#1 DoublesLydia Jeon / Susan Rubin vs Patricia Lozada / Nicole Perso2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesPatty Ohle / Yuri Tam vs Ying Guo / Linda Murphy5-7, 5-6
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 standings11 teams · E
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Chi Brown 1 Sun 2 $259132823263
2CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W S Barrington Burns Sat 11 $2082281228272
3CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W River Trails Cox Sun 6 $2082251537301
4CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Bann Gordon Sun 12 $2564221839296
5CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Chi Brown 2 Sat 6 $2555211940290
6CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W Tam Wolff Sun 3 $2055231743341
7CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W Heritage Werts Sat 3 $2155182248353
8CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Pal Watson Sun 1 $2546202047353
9CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W Centennial Wissig Sun 5 $2046152555366
10CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W MT Pal Lange Sat 2 $2519122861396
11CDTA E 18&O W/E 3.0W Glenbrook Turdo Sun 3 $2501043674465

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 3.02 estimated across 5 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.

Christina Turdo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.29
Jamie Gorey
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.21
3.20
Yuri Tam
published 3.5
3.12
Laurie Chern
published 3.5
2.28
Heejin Shin
published 3
Elizabeth Monge
published 2.5
Lydia Jeon
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Patty Ohle
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Rubin
usually #1 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.

Lydia Jeon + Jamie Gorey3343% gamesnot enough data
Susan Rubin + Lydia Jeon2345% gamesnot enough data
Yuri Tam + Laura Munitz Johnson3253% gamesnot enough data
Heejin Shin + Laura Munitz Johnson224 matchesnot enough data
Yuri Tam + Patty Ohle224 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.

4.5
Christina Turdo
6W–4L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Jamie Gorey
82W–90L career · 8 lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.29
3.5
Laura Munitz Johnson
38W–59L career · no lines in 2022
5%93%1%
3.21
3.5
Yuri Tam
65W–48L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.20
3.5
Laurie Chern
33W–50L career · no lines in 2022
17%83%<1%
3.12
3
Heejin Shin
3W–25L career · type S · no lines in 2022
95%5%<1%
2.28
2.5
Elizabeth Monge
0W–25L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Lydia Jeon
20W–18L career · 8 lines in 2022
not enough data
Patty Ohle
7W–18L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Susan Rubin
6W–24L career · 1 line 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.