Teams

CENTRAL/Acing Gracefully

Adult 55 & Over Summer · 6.0 Women - Central Day NJD

13 players · average NTRP 2.93 / NEW JERSEY

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-07-31vs Sweet WarriorsLost 12
W#1 DoublesJudy Singleton / Marlene Mannion vs Mary Ricardo / Michele Friedman6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesCatherine Taaffe / Jeanne Dicicco vs Beth Witte / Jill Pincus0-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesSusan Gilli / Suzanne Proulx vs Erika Verschelde / Sue Fabisak0-6, 2-3
2025-07-29vs Sassy SkortsWon 30
W#1 DoublesJill Schulz / Susan Desilva vs Catherine Suydam / Mona Sickles6-3, 3-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJudy Singleton / Ana Shah vs Lisa Ganzman / Ildiko Szabo-Zitany6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesNanci Levine / Linda Haderer vs Jennifer YP Lee / Mara Wilmot6-2, 7-5
2025-07-17vs Sweet WarriorsLost 12
W#1 DoublesSusan Desilva / Jill Schulz vs Marcia Cohen / Doreen Kelly6-4, 5-3
L#2 DoublesJudy Singleton / Barbara Wilson vs Michele Friedman / Maria Parmentola6-2, 5-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesCatherine Taaffe / Marlene Mannion vs Lucia Marchetta / Erika Verschelde5-7, 5-4, 1-0
2025-07-10vs Sassy SkortsWon 21
W#1 DoublesSusan Desilva / Jill Schulz vs Jennifer Giblin / Mona Sickles6-3, 6-0
W#2 DoublesJudy Singleton / Nanci Levine vs Jennifer Ianniello / Helen Mitrani3-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJeanne Dicicco / Barbara Wilson vs Catherine Suydam / Rebecca DePorte6-3, 0-6, 0-1
2025-06-25vs Sassy SkortsLost 01
L#3 DoublesRong Nie / Judy Singleton vs Michelle Emerson / Lisa Ganzman6-3, 6-7, 0-1
2025-06-19vs Sweet WarriorsWon 21
W#1 DoublesJill Schulz / Susan Desilva vs Marcia Cohen / Jill Pincus6-4, 6-0
W#2 DoublesMarlene Mannion / Linda Haderer vs Wendy Worth / Beth Witte6-3, 1-5, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSuzanne Proulx / Susan Gilli vs Laurie Goldzweig / Sue Fabisak2-6, 2-6
2025-06-12vs Sassy SkortsWon 30
W#1 DoublesSusan Desilva / Jill Schulz vs Mara Wilmot / Lisa Ganzman7-6, 4-0
W#2 DoublesJeanette Timmons / Nanci Levine vs Francesca Corrias / Elisa Cohen6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesBarbara Wilson / Ana Shah vs Helen Mitrani / Jennifer Ianniello6-1, 7-5
2025-06-04vs Sassy SkortsLost 01
L#3 DoublesDiane Albala / Judy Singleton vs Anne Kabay / Jennifer Giblin4-6, 1-6
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 standings2 teams · 6.0 Women - Central Day NJD
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CENTRAL/Acing Gracefully0612615140
2Sassy Skorts0631532195

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 2.66 estimated across 12 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.

2.95
Ana Shah
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.92
Susan Desilva
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.87
Judy Singleton
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.83
Jeanette Timmons
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.82
Jill Schulz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.80
Marlene Mannion
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.80
Nanci Levine
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.80
Linda Haderer
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Barbara Wilson
published 3
2.51
Catherine Taaffe
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.33
Jeanne Dicicco
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.31
Suzanne Proulx
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.04
Susan Gilli
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
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.

Catherine Taaffe + Ana Shah6456% games+8.3% vs expected
Susan Desilva + Jill Schulz18461% games+7.4% vs expected
Ana Shah + Judy Singleton5355% games+3.6% vs expected
Catherine Taaffe + Marlene Mannion31345% games+2.4% vs expected
Nanci Levine + Linda Haderer151654% games+1.8% vs expected
Susan Gilli + Marlene Mannion16854% games+1.3% vs expected
Linda Haderer + Jeanette Timmons6348% games+1.2% vs expected
Suzanne Proulx + Marlene Mannion4351% games−3.2% 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.

3
Ana Shah
45W–40L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%64%36%
2.95
Susan Desilva
23W–5L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%72%28%
2.92
Judy Singleton
47W–45L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
2.87
Jeanette Timmons
57W–51L career · 1 line in 2025
1%88%11%
2.83
Jill Schulz
89W–57L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
2.82
3
Marlene Mannion
90W–80L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%90%8%
2.80
3
Nanci Levine
104W–189L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%90%8%
2.80
3
Linda Haderer
116W–150L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%91%8%
2.80
3
Barbara Wilson
53W–86L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
3
Catherine Taaffe
106W–166L career · type A · 2 lines in 2025
48%52%<1%
2.51
Jeanne Dicicco
36W–53L career · 2 lines in 2025
89%11%<1%
2.33
Suzanne Proulx
22W–36L career · 2 lines in 2025
92%8%<1%
2.31
2.5
Susan Gilli
55W–80L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.04

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.