Teams

NITA E 80MX40d Naperville TC (Podwika)

2022 NITA1 ESL Mixed 40 & Over · NITA ESL 40 & Over 8.0 Mixed

9 players · average NTRP 4.08 / 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 →
Schedule3 played
W#1 DoublesMarilyn Tansey / Kevin Podwika vs Mark Juhl / GRACE CARDOS6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJohn Laurx / Debbi Landorf vs Alex Paz / Laurie Sandman6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesMelissa Held / Timothy Schmeltz vs Chris Klein / Elisa Zusman7-5, 6-3
W#1 DoublesKevin Podwika / Marilyn Tansey vs Bruce Thornquist / Jennifer Grady6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJohn Laurx / Debbi Landorf vs Joon Sung / Silvia Kusaka6-2, 7-5
2021-10-01Won 20
W#2 DoublesCindy Sullivan / Kevin Podwika vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesDebbi Landorf / Andrew Balzer vs N/A6-0, 6-0
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 standings4 teams · NITA ESL 40 & Over 8.0 Mixed
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA E 80MX40a TAM (Marberry/Sung)6218614118
2NITA E 80MX40b Midtown AC (Meng/Smith)35101429181
3NITA E 80MX40d Naperville TC (Podwika)3581632221
4WITHDREW NITA E 80MX40c TAM (Aguayo)000000

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 3.76 estimated across 8 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.

4.32
Deniz Karacay
published 4.5
4.12
John Laurx
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.83
Marilyn Tansey
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.75
Kevin Podwika
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
Cindy Sullivan
published 4
3.58
Melissa Held
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.58
Julie Rusin
published
3.53
Timothy Schmeltz
published
3.40
Debbi Landorf
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
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.

Debbi Landorf + John Laurx561759% games+3.9% vs expected
Kevin Podwika + Julie Rusin18854% games+2.0% vs expected
Kevin Podwika + Marilyn Tansey14956% games−1.7% vs expected
Deniz Karacay + Debbi Landorf4261% gamesnot enough data
Deniz Karacay + Melissa Held303 matchesnot enough data
John Laurx + Melissa Held033 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
Deniz Karacay
102W–71L career · no lines in 2022
1%91%8%
4.32
4.5
John Laurx
188W–157L career · 2 lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
4.12
4
Marilyn Tansey
216W–144L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%90%10%
3.83
4
Kevin Podwika
361W–203L career · 3 lines in 2022
2%95%3%
3.75
4
Cindy Sullivan
76W–48L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Melissa Held
53W–65L career · 1 line in 2022
26%74%<1%
3.58
Julie Rusin
59W–24L career · no lines in 2022
27%73%<1%
3.58
Timothy Schmeltz
1W–11L career · no lines in 2022
41%59%<1%
3.53
3.5
Debbi Landorf
191W–79L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%78%21%
3.40

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.