Teams

BSF:Jet Sets:Dodd/

2025 NCT Tri Level Women · 3.5 Women Tri Level 1

4 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTHERN CONNECTICUT

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
2025-12-10vs BSF:Tri Us:Fausey/Won 10
W#1 DoublesMary Beth Jordan / Chapin Yates vs Debbie Horovitz / Christine Abreu6-1, 6-4
2025-11-20vs BSF:That's My Fault!:CoccomoWon 10
W#1 DoublesMary Beth Jordan / Chapin Yates vs Suzanne Neville / Rebecca Fausel6-4, 6-0
2025-11-18vs FV:Game Set Chat:Post Perez/YaffeeLost 01
L#1 DoublesJulie Cutler / Shelley Dodd vs Allison Yaffee / Christie Kania0-6, 0-6
2025-11-10vs BTC:Different Strokes:GriffithLost 01
L#1 DoublesJulie Cutler / Shelley Dodd vs Stephanie Gaidos / Veronica Grubin5-7, 6-7
2025-11-03vs RFL:Love Hurts:Sullivan/Won 10
W#1 DoublesMary Beth Jordan / Chapin Yates vs Marisa Sullivan / Nan Flanagan6-3, 6-3
W#1 DoublesJulie Cutler / Shelley Dodd vs Kathryn Hanson / Trish Rosa1-6, 6-1, 1-0
2025-10-10vs PRC:Rally Cats:Mauro/Won 10
W#1 DoublesJulie Cutler / Shelley Dodd vs Sandra Mauro / Becky Klimkosky6-4, 2-6, 1-0
2025-09-09vs BTC:String Courtette:Walsh/Won 10
W#1 DoublesShelley Dodd / Julie Cutler vs Maureen Vaughn / Linda Wright6-2, 6-3
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 standings9 teams · 3.5 Women Tri Level 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1FV:Game Set Chat:Post Perez/Yaffee0871242
2BSF:That's My Fault!:Coccomo0871445
3BSF:Jet Sets:Dodd/0862663
4RFL:Love Hurts:Sullivan/0853874
5MRC:MRC 3.5 Northern CT Tri Level:Bandak/0844962
6BSF:Tri Us:Fausey/08351176
7BTC:String Courtette:Walsh/08261290
8PRC:Rally Cats:Mauro/08171484
9BTC:Different Strokes:Griffith08171496

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 3.29 estimated across 3 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.

3.50
Mary Beth Jordan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.38
Chapin Yates
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.98
Shelley Dodd
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Julie Cutler
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 Beth Jordan + Chapin Yates8072% games+24.4% 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.

Mary Beth Jordan
37W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%51%49%
3.50
3.5
Chapin Yates
25W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%80%20%
3.38
Shelley Dodd
73W–90L career · 5 lines in 2025
56%44%<1%
2.98
Julie Cutler
13W–8L 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.