Teams

MSIL A65&O 8.0W Mangina-Bloomington

2022 Adult 65 & Over - West League · West MSIL 65 & Over 8.0W

7 players · average NTRP 3.50 / MID-SOUTH ILLINOIS

View scouting list →
Schedule
Flight standings2 teams · West MSIL 65 & Over 8.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Midwest/Paffrath/A65&O 8.0W50150253
2MSIL A65&O 8.0W Mangina-Bloomington0501530181

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 3.17 estimated across 6 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.

3.61
Sally Mangina
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 13% · published 4
3.30
Janet Reckard
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.25
Jan Dickerson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.06
Dorothy Deschler
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.01
Patricia Wombacher
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published 3.5
2.79
Sue Chelikas
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Linda Roberts
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · 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.

Dorothy Deschler + Janet Reckard7358% games+3.9% vs expected
Linda Roberts + Janet Reckard6449% games−10.1% vs expected
Jan Dickerson + Janet Reckard3447% gamesnot enough data
Sally Mangina + Jan Dickerson0634% gamesnot enough data
Linda Roberts + Dorothy Deschler3253% gamesnot 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
Sally Mangina
127W–117L career · 8 lines in 2022
21%79%<1%
3.61
3.5
Janet Reckard
67W–48L career · 6 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.30
3.5
Jan Dickerson
104W–104L career · 8 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Dorothy Deschler
133W–128L career · 5 lines in 2022
31%69%<1%
3.06
3.5
Patricia Wombacher
49W–69L career · 7 lines in 2022
47%53%<1%
3.01
3
Sue Chelikas
68W–138L career · 6 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
2.79
Linda Roberts
30W–26L career · 3 lines 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.