Teams

A18 2.5W TP Laux

2023 NEOTA Adult 18 & Over · NEOTA A18&O 2.5 Women Spring

13 players · average NTRP 2.80 / NORTHEASTERN OHIO

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 →
Flight standings9 teams · NEOTA A18&O 2.5 Women Spring
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1A18 2.5W NC Adams8222820225
2A18 2.5W CRC Goldsmith64181226230
3A18 2.5W PW Hensley55161431255
4A18 2.5W PM Tople55151535268
5A18 2.5W TP Laux55141635278
6A18 2.5W WR Bolbach46121838288
7A18 2.5W CV Fromson37131738285
8A18 2.5W MV Wortmann37111940294
9A18 2.5W LT Mitchell1982246314

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 2.48 estimated across 7 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.

2.85
Colleen Tate
usually #1 Singles 86%, also #2 Singles 7% · published 3
2.78
Michelle Akhtar
usually #2 Doubles 86%, also #1 Doubles 14% · published
2.56
Anne Laux
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3
2.48
Erica Gerstenmaier
usually #1 Doubles 39%, also #1 Singles 39% · published 3
2.38
Theresa Leffler
usually #1 Doubles 77%, also #1 Singles 15% · published
Gretchen Gibson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.20
Diane Kilivris
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 2.5
2.11
Katherine Harris
usually #2 Doubles 64%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published
Crystal Cole
published
Julie Dilber
usually #1 Doubles 64%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published
LISA BATES
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Stacie Switzer
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 19% · published
Tracy Campbell
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 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.

Stacie Switzer + Michelle Akhtar3255% games+11.1% vs expected
Colleen Tate + Michelle Akhtar9364% games+9.5% vs expected
Diane Kilivris + Theresa Leffler2541% games+1.4% vs expected
Theresa Leffler + Julie Dilber2546% games+0.9% vs expected
Stacie Switzer + Erica Gerstenmaier2342% gamesnot enough data
Erica Gerstenmaier + Diane Kilivris1443% gamesnot enough data
Katherine Harris + Theresa Leffler224 matchesnot enough data
Diane Kilivris + Julie Dilber224 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
Colleen Tate
48W–40L career · 14 lines in 2023
<1%88%12%
2.85
Michelle Akhtar
33W–23L career · 7 lines in 2023
2%94%4%
2.78
3
Anne Laux
47W–59L career · 12 lines in 2023
32%68%<1%
2.56
3
Erica Gerstenmaier
35W–34L career · 13 lines in 2023
55%45%<1%
2.48
Theresa Leffler
51W–77L career · 13 lines in 2023
0%81%19%
2.38
2.5
Gretchen Gibson
0W–14L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
2.5
Diane Kilivris
24W–58L career · 10 lines in 2023
0%99%1%
2.20
Katherine Harris
23W–47L career · 14 lines in 2023
0%>99%<1%
2.11
Crystal Cole
2W–6L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Julie Dilber
12W–35L career · 11 lines in 2023
not enough data
LISA BATES
30W–40L career · 5 lines in 2023
not enough data
Stacie Switzer
27W–41L career · 16 lines in 2023
not enough data
Tracy Campbell
15W–29L career · 4 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.