Teams

CDTA S A40W4.0 7MT Bann Coy Tue 6:30 $27

CDTA 1Summer Adult 40 & Over wknd · nght

19 players · average NTRP 3.95 / 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 DoublesIva Gregorova / Molly Shapiro vs Gayle Dominicis / Martha Lloyd6-1, 6-2
L#2 DoublesLisa Potash / Heather Vishnubhakat vs Karen Light / Stacey Tomczak6-7, 6-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJennifer Giertsen / Jennifer Margolis vs Stephanie Remelius / Debra Brambora4-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesSusan Kalina / Lisa Rosen vs Joanne Lund / Carlene Motto6-4, 3-5, 1-0
L#1 DoublesRochelle Meng / Lisa Potash vs Martha Davis / Jennifer Langtry2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesMary Cooper / Jennifer Margolis vs Chris Purcell / Nancy Manolis4-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesJennifer Giertsen / Rachel Kaiser vs Cheryl Jasinski / Catherine Battin7-6, 3-2
L#2 DoublesRachel Kaiser / Molly Shapiro vs Nora Errico / Terri Whiting3-6, 3-6
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 · nght
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA S A40W4.0 1Tam Corey Sun 11 $226019512128
2CDTA S A40W4.0 6Barrington Gray Sat 9 $245117718179
3CDTA S A40W4.0 5Nielsen Sheridan Sat 4 $224217719157
4CDTA S A40W4.0 4Barrington Willis Tue 7 $254215923186
5CDTA S A40W4.0 7MT Bann Coy Tue 6:30 $2733131125194
6CDTA S A40W4.0 9Hinsdale Cashman Tue 6:30 $2233121226200
7CDTA S A40W4.0 2Tam Lund Thu 7 $223391533221
8CDTA S A40W4.0 10Glenbrook Hans Sat 10 $252491532232
9CDTA S A40W4.0 8Nielsen Burnside Sat 4 $251581633215
10CDTA S A40W4.0 11Forest View Hayashida Mon 7 $231571737241
11CDTA S A40W4.0 3River Trails Jasinski Tue 7 $261561838243

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 3.71 estimated across 16 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.

4.02
Anna Dau
published 4
4.00
Iva Gregorova
published 4
4.00
Kristen Coy
published 4
3.98
Desiree Witte
published 4
3.76
Molly Shapiro
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.75
Sheila Bondoc
published 4
3.71
Monique Melnick
published 4
3.63
Leah Starkman
published 4
3.63
Susan Kalina
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.61
Rochelle Meng
published 4
3.58
3.56
Lisa Potash
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.56
Rachel Kaiser
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.55
Narissa Breger
published 4
3.51
Jennifer Margolis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.46
Jennifer Giertsen
published 3.5
Julie Steinberg
published
Lisa Rosen
published
Shelley Ireland
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.

Rachel Kaiser + Rochelle Meng6749% games+17.8% vs expected
Desiree Witte + Anna Dau5257% games+10.7% vs expected
Molly Shapiro + Iva Gregorova9064% games+10.2% vs expected
Kristen Coy + Anna Dau11164% games+8.0% vs expected
Heather Vishnubhakat + Rochelle Meng6460% games+7.3% vs expected
Molly Shapiro + Desiree Witte5256% games+7.2% vs expected
Molly Shapiro + Jennifer Giertsen4157% games+6.1% vs expected
Sheila Bondoc + Desiree Witte23961% games+6.0% 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
Anna Dau
206W–99L career · no lines in 2025
<1%44%56%
4.02
4
Iva Gregorova
66W–36L career · no lines in 2025
<1%50%50%
4.00
4
Kristen Coy
127W–62L career · no lines in 2025
<1%51%49%
4.00
4
Desiree Witte
258W–188L career · no lines in 2025
<1%55%45%
3.98
Molly Shapiro
58W–42L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
3.76
4
Sheila Bondoc
117W–62L career · no lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Monique Melnick
93W–91L career · no lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.71
4
Leah Starkman
228W–152L career · no lines in 2025
15%84%<1%
3.63
Susan Kalina
52W–41L career · 1 line in 2025
16%83%<1%
3.63
4
Rochelle Meng
184W–198L career · no lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.61
4
Heather Vishnubhakat
130W–98L career · no lines in 2025
27%73%<1%
3.58
Lisa Potash
67W–76L career · 2 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.56
Rachel Kaiser
45W–45L career · 2 lines in 2025
32%67%<1%
3.56
4
Narissa Breger
162W–99L career · no lines in 2025
34%66%<1%
3.55
Jennifer Margolis
31W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
48%52%<1%
3.51
3.5
Jennifer Giertsen
110W–84L career · no lines in 2025
<1%63%37%
3.46
Julie Steinberg
87W–36L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Lisa Rosen
9W–15L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Shelley Ireland
2W–3L career · no lines in 2025
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.