Teams

NITA S 65CWd Challenge-Keane

2024 NITA3 Summerz Combo · NITA Summer 6.5 Combo Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.33 / NORTHERN ILLINOIS

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
W#1 DoublesRosemary Quinn / Sylvie Rossi vs Amy Klein / Donna Chambers7-5, 3-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCarol Henry / Brianna Keane vs Ann Fell / Jennifer Brosnan6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesLoreal Leonard / Ashley Burk vs Kay Noonan / Connie Lutz6-2, 6-2
L#1 DoublesMary Kate Buchheit / Gabriela Perillo vs Linda Meyer / Jessica Coffin2-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesBrittany Armbruster / Brianna Keane vs Nicole Watson / Amy Shappert7-5, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAshley Burk / Loreal Leonard vs Elisa Zusman / Sydney Zusman6-3, 6-1
2024-07-11vs NITA S 65CWe Eola-Wagner/FloodLost 12
L#1 DoublesBrittany Armbruster / Brianna Keane vs Carie MacKey / Rebecca Flood2-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMary Kate Buchheit / Gabriela Perillo vs Christina Brady / Jennifer Klepper6-2, 6-2
L#3 DoublesLoreal Leonard / Sylvie Rossi vs Jessica Priebe / Camille Rhoades6-2, 2-6, 1-0
2024-06-17vs NITA S 65CWa Five Star-DelgrossoWon 30
W#1 DoublesRosemary Quinn / Sylvie Rossi vs Kristen Recchia / Denise McKenna5-7, 4-3, 1-0
W#2 DoublesBrianna Keane / Gabriela Perillo vs Lori Vardas / Brooke Henders7-5, 5-3
W#3 DoublesLoreal Leonard / Ashley Burk vs Becky Sharp / Micki Naal6-2, 6-3
L#1 DoublesCarol Henry / Loreal Leonard vs Toni Mountcastle / Anne Rockwell7-5, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesKaren Blaze / Brianna Keane vs Bridget Draz / Jane Loeser3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesRosemary Quinn / Ashley Burk vs Carolyn Humpherson / Anne Rago Hackett4-6, 3-6
W#1 DoublesBrittany Armbruster / Brianna Keane vs Christine Cucinotta - * / Rachel Dardis7-5, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLoreal Leonard / Carol Henry vs Suzanne Griffin / Catherine Schiavone6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesSylvie Rossi / Rosemary Quinn vs Brigette Whisnant - * / Jill Goldstein6-0, 6-2
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 standings7 teams · NITA Summer 6.5 Combo Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA S 65CWg Courts Plus/Berens-Anderson511448108
2NITA S 65CWa Five Star-Delgrosso4212612112
3NITA S 65CWd Challenge-Keane4212612129
4NITA S 65CWe Eola-Wagner/Flood4212619133
5NITA S 65CWb Bannockburn-Watson/Sheldon2451326189
6NITA S 65CWc Vaughan-Sherman/Jirsa1541428195
7NITA S 65CWf Oak Park CC-Crabb/Whisnant1541429180

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 3.20 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.

3.44
Brianna Keane
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.33
Loreal Leonard
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
Carol Henry
published 3.5
3.18
Brittany Armbruster
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.12
Ashley Burk
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.96
Sylvie Rossi
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
Gabriela Perillo
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Karen Blaze
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kim Kucharski
published
Lauren Slomka
published
Mary Kate Buchheit
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Rosemary Quinn
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · 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.

Loreal Leonard + Ashley Burk9363% games+15.8% vs expected
Brianna Keane + Loreal Leonard6749% games+1.1% vs expected
Sylvie Rossi + Ashley Burk1444% games−6.2% vs expected
Mary Kate Buchheit + Gabriela Perillo7453% gamesnot enough data
Rosemary Quinn + Sylvie Rossi6255% gamesnot enough data
Brittany Armbruster + Brianna Keane5160% gamesnot enough data
Rosemary Quinn + Ashley Burk123 matchesnot enough data
Brittany Armbruster + Loreal Leonard303 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.

3.5
Brianna Keane
102W–43L career · 6 lines in 2024
<1%68%32%
3.44
3.5
Loreal Leonard
76W–41L career · 6 lines in 2024
1%87%12%
3.33
3.5
Carol Henry
23W–24L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Brittany Armbruster
32W–33L career · 3 lines in 2024
10%89%1%
3.18
3
Ashley Burk
37W–30L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%20%80%
3.12
3
Sylvie Rossi
43W–28L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%62%38%
2.96
Gabriela Perillo
9W–6L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Karen Blaze
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Kim Kucharski
0W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Lauren Slomka
0W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Mary Kate Buchheit
12W–4L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Rosemary Quinn
11W–25L career · 4 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.