Teams

Smash Sisters

2022 USTA ADULT 55 and OVER - BOISE · TV

14 players · average NTRP 3.50 / IDAHO

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 →
Schedule4 played
2022-06-29vs Alley Kats 55Won 10
W#1 DoublesCindy Tuck / Kristen Jacobs vs Kathy Miller / Soeurette Chambreau6-1, 6-1
2022-06-20vs No Drama MamasWon 10
W#1 DoublesKristen Jacobs / Cindy Tuck vs Cecelia Larson / Margaret Burke6-1, 6-1
2022-06-15vs Hillcrest Hot ShotsWon 10
W#1 DoublesKristen Jacobs / Cindy Tuck vs Shawna Ianson / Lynnette Flerchinger6-2, 6-3
2022-06-01vs Each Hit AgainLost 01
L#2 DoublesTina Taylor / Cindy Tuck vs Zel Mertz / Terri Wippel4-6, 7-5, 0-1
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 standings8 teams · TV
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Each Hit Again822649175
2Smash Sisters8221921207
3Touch of Gray8221921224
4No Drama Mamas55151536288
5Alley Kats 5555121841300
6COGs37111942306
7Hillcrest Hot Shots37111943314
8Nicer Aces01032755345

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 3.31 estimated across 11 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.

3.97
Kristen Jacobs
published 4
3.74
Mary Parsons
published 4
3.58
Mary Burke
published 4
3.42
Dawn Crochet
published 3.5
3.29
Mary Chodroff
published 3.5
3.26
Fariss Mcgee
published 3.5
Diana Hornung
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published 3.5
3.23
Adrianne Fisher
published 3.5
3.21
Kelly Loeb
published
3.09
Mary Adcox
published 3.5
2.81
Hitomi Saheki
published 3
2.81
Cindy Tuck
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Julie Eisele
usually #3 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 42% · 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.

Mary Adcox + Mary Parsons7269% games+8.2% vs expected
Mary Burke + Dawn Crochet13956% games+7.7% vs expected
Mary Burke + Mary Adcox111750% games+2.5% vs expected
Jan Ingelstrom-Stewart + Kelly Loeb3546% games+2.5% vs expected
Fariss Mcgee + Dawn Crochet251655% games+2.2% vs expected
Mary Adcox + Dawn Crochet4949% games+1.7% vs expected
Mary Chodroff + Jan Ingelstrom-Stewart171253% games+0.1% vs expected
Jan Ingelstrom-Stewart + Mary Parsons131049% games−1.4% vs expected
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
Kristen Jacobs
212W–92L career · no lines in 2022
<1%58%42%
3.97
4
Mary Parsons
169W–125L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%2%
3.74
4
Mary Burke
151W–103L career · no lines in 2022
27%73%<1%
3.58
3.5
Dawn Crochet
170W–181L career · no lines in 2022
<1%73%27%
3.42
3.5
Mary Chodroff
115W–104L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.29
3.5
Fariss Mcgee
79W–93L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Diana Hornung
41W–33L career · 10 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Adrianne Fisher
85W–73L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.23
Kelly Loeb
91W–100L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.21
3.5
Mary Adcox
151W–195L career · no lines in 2022
23%76%<1%
3.09
3
Hitomi Saheki
47W–64L career · no lines in 2022
1%91%8%
2.81
3
Jan Ingelstrom-Stewart
62W–73L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%7%
2.81
3
Cindy Tuck
22W–26L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Julie Eisele
47W–53L career · 12 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.