Teams

ETC:SpinHeads:Rakas

2025 WMA Tri-Level Spring (2025) · 3.0 Women 1

4 players · average NTRP 3.00 / WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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 →
Schedule8 played
2025-07-16vs ETC:Between the Lines:GrocottLost 01
L#1 DoublesMika Inoue / Kristen Dygon vs Jean Peretti / Liz Bone5-7, 3-2, 1-0
2025-07-09vs ETC:Pink Rally Club:OLeary/MartinWon 10
W#1 DoublesMargaret Rakas / Allison Cheney vs Stephanie O'Leary / Madeleine Martin6-2, 6-3
2025-07-05vs LTC:GTP:Terrinca/JordanWon 10
W#1 DoublesMargaret Rakas / Mika Inoue vs Eileen Jordan / Linda Terrinca6-2, 5-1
2025-07-02vs ETC:Alley Cats: MartinWon 10
W#1 DoublesMargaret Rakas / Allison Cheney vs Mina Martin / Megan Scully6-4, 6-1
2025-07-01vs ETC:Pink Rally Club:OLeary/MartinWon 10
W#1 DoublesKristen Dygon / Mika Inoue vs Joy Baskin / Amy Anderlonis6-3, 6-1
2025-06-29vs ETC:Alley Cats: MartinWon 10
W#1 DoublesMika Inoue / Allison Cheney vs Dena Przybyl / Megan Scully6-2, 5-4
2025-06-15vs ETC:Between the Lines:GrocottLost 01
L#1 DoublesMargaret Rakas / Allison Cheney vs Elaine Grocott / Jean Peretti6-3, 3-4, 0-1
2025-05-09vs LTC:GTP:Terrinca/JordanWon 10
W#1 DoublesAllison Cheney / Kristen Dygon vs Eileen Jordan / Linda Terrinca6-2, 4-2
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 standings5 teams · 3.0 Women 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1ETC:Between the Lines:Grocott8080462
2ETC:SpinHeads:Rakas6262444
3LTC:GTP:Terrinca/Jordan25251168
4ETC:Pink Rally Club:OLeary/Martin25251175
5ETC:Alley Cats: Martin17171584

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 2.91 estimated across 4 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.

3.12
Mika Inoue
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.86
Allison Cheney
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.84
Margaret Rakas
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.82
Kristen Dygon
usually #1 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.

Allison Cheney + Kristen Dygon4258% games+15.5% vs expected
Margaret Rakas + Mika Inoue9173% games+13.3% vs expected
Allison Cheney + Margaret Rakas11358% games+8.6% vs expected
Mika Inoue + Kristen Dygon3260% games+7.9% vs expected
Margaret Rakas + Kristen Dygon10655% games+3.0% vs expected
Allison Cheney + Mika Inoue213 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.

Mika Inoue
82W–59L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%21%79%
3.12
3
Allison Cheney
52W–36L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%84%15%
2.86
Margaret Rakas
64W–35L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%87%13%
2.84
Kristen Dygon
36W–27L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
2.82

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.