Teams

CDTA S 40&O 4.0W Oak Brook TC Lukas Tues 7 $20

CDTA Summer Adult 40 & Over WN · WE

15 players · average NTRP 4.06 / CHICAGO

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 →
Schedule5 played
W#1 DoublesNancy Cushing / Tracy Richards vs Lisa Rowen / Marinne Leonard6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesAnn Murtaugh / Colleen Stover vs Kimberly Abbs / Stephanie Batka6-2, 6-3
L#3 DoublesTracie Wilcox / Molly McGinnis vs Janet Wolf / Kelly Good2-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesNancy Cushing / Keli Redinger vs Marla Gerard / Suzi Winters3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#1 SinglesJennifer Krysinski vs Denise Huth7-5, 0-1, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAnn Murtaugh / Colleen Stover vs Kelly O'Donnell / Cathy Evangelist6-4, 6-4
W#3 DoublesTracie Wilcox / Molly McGinnis vs Julie Boruff / Stephanie Stern7-5, 6-3
W#1 DoublesNancy Cushing / Tracy Richards vs Dawn Pollack / Laura Purcell6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesAngela Lukas / Jennifer Peterson vs Antje Boeing / Karen Salter6-1, 4-6, 1-0
W#1 DoublesNancy Cushing / Tracy Richards vs Cara Waddle / Desiree Witte7-5, 3-1
W#1 SinglesAbigail Emerson vs Kristine Blaser6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesMaureen Porter / Keli Redinger vs Pam Fisher / Jennifer Margolis2-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAnn Murtaugh / Tracie Wilcox vs Christina Greeley / Julie Steinberg6-1, 6-2
L#1 DoublesNancy Cushing / Tracy Richards vs Christine Meade / Dawn Baumann7-6, 3-5, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMaureen Porter / Keli Redinger vs Elizabeth Quigley / Stephanie Thompson7-5, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMichele Muchmore / Molly McGinnis vs Martha Davis / Renee Buxton4-6, 6-4, 1-0
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 standings11 teams · WE
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA S 40&O 4.0W S Barrington Gray Sat 9 $20602049157
2CDTA S 40&O 4.0W Oak Brook TC Lukas Tues 7 $205121312128
3CDTA S 40&O 4.0W Oak Brook TC Knutte Sun 2 $205116819173
4CDTA S 40&O 4.0W MT Bann Meng Tues 6:30 $2542131124197
5CDTA S 40&O 4.0W Tam Corey Sun 11 $2233131128207
6CDTA S 40&O 4.0W River Trails Jasinski Tues 7 $2024101432223
7CDTA S 40&O 4.0W Forest View Hayashida Mon 7 $212491532207
8CDTA S 40&O 4.0W Hinsdale Cashman Wed 6:30 $202491533234
9CDTA S 40&O 4.0W Biltmore Szela Sun 3 $201571738249
10(DROPPED) CDTA S 40&O 4.0W S Barrington Martinez Thurs 7 $20000000
11CDTA S 40&O 4.0W Tam Lund Thurs 7 $220622246281

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 3.75 estimated across 10 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.

3.96
Nancy Cushing
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.95
Colleen Stover
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.90
Tracy Richards
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.80
Louise Burnison
published 4
3.76
Ann Murtaugh
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
Abigail Emerson
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.70
Michele Muchmore
published 4
3.67
Tracie Wilcox
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.67
Carlene Motto
published 4
3.63
Molly McGinnis
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.45
Angela Lukas
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
Jennifer Krysinski
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Jennifer Lenahan
published
Keli Redinger
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Maureen Porter
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Maureen Porter + Colleen Stover15269% games+10.6% vs expected
Maureen Porter + Tracy Richards9357% games+9.9% vs expected
Maureen Porter + Nancy Cushing18461% games+7.5% vs expected
Tracy Richards + Ann Murtaugh8557% games+5.0% vs expected
Ann Murtaugh + Tracie Wilcox271157% games+3.5% vs expected
Molly McGinnis + Tracy Richards2552% games+3.0% vs expected
Colleen Stover + Ann Murtaugh11261% games+1.8% vs expected
Colleen Stover + Nancy Cushing6357% games+1.6% 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.

Nancy Cushing
236W–117L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%62%38%
3.96
4.5
Colleen Stover
89W–46L career · 2 lines in 2022
65%35%<1%
3.95
Tracy Richards
117W–53L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%79%21%
3.90
4
Louise Burnison
69W–60L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.80
4
Ann Murtaugh
149W–99L career · 3 lines in 2022
2%95%3%
3.76
4
Abigail Emerson
34W–19L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
4
Michele Muchmore
26W–21L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.70
4
Tracie Wilcox
91W–67L career · 3 lines in 2022
10%90%1%
3.67
4
Carlene Motto
131W–124L career · no lines in 2022
10%89%<1%
3.67
Molly McGinnis
62W–54L career · 3 lines in 2022
17%83%<1%
3.63
4
Angela Lukas
106W–140L career · 1 line in 2022
64%36%<1%
3.45
Jennifer Krysinski
58W–60L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Jennifer Lenahan
26W–27L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Keli Redinger
29W–10L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Maureen Porter
108W–28L career · 2 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.