Teams

Scioto CC

2024 SUMMER Combo Women · Summer 7.5W Combo

25 players · average NTRP 3.60 / OHIO VALLEY

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 →
Schedule9 played
2024-08-15vs BrooksideWon 21
W#1 DoublesAlyson Thompson / Aimee White vs Megan Williams / Angela Parsons6-3, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJulie Gruss / Judy Barbao vs Katie Hire / Morgan Davidge6-2, 6-3
L#3 DoublesAlison Scott / Kelly Stoeckinger vs Kristin Randall / Laura Fox5-7, 3-6
2024-08-08vs WedgewoodWon 21
W#1 DoublesAlyson Thompson / Diane Zieg vs Ashley Skop / Leslie Holman6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesSusan Sugar / Shelly Krauss vs Julie Smerdel / Abigail Shoemaker6-3, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJill Mizer / Tiffany Lhota vs Andrea McClymont / Kim Schmid4-6, 7-5, 0-1
2024-07-18vs The Players ClubWon 21
W#1 DoublesAlyson Thompson / Diane MacDonald vs Julie Samora / Shilpa Marano7-5, 7-5
L#2 DoublesDanielle Milliken / Shelly Savan vs Heather Rhule / Fujiko Itabashi4-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#3 DoublesAmber Scott / Julie Gruss vs Suzanne Shealy / Stacey Royer6-4, 6-3
2024-07-11vs Wickertree 1Won 20
W#2 DoublesAlyson Thompson / AMY CORNA vs Eileen Pewitt / Erin Flynn6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJudy Barbao / Colleen Powers vs Mary McGuff / Ami Latham6-0, 6-2
2024-06-27vs OlympicLost 03
L#1 DoublesLeah Wagenbrenner / Danielle Milliken vs Barbara Wiese / Jennifer Rambin2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesAmber Scott / Katrina Ruscilli vs Allison Moneme / Beth Houck7-5, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesLis McNealey Spaine / Jill Mizer vs Jane Heath / Jennifer McNally1-6, 3-6
2024-06-20vs Racquet ClubLost 03
L#1 DoublesAlyson Thompson / Marcy Schoedinger vs Angela Flanigan / Amanda Guzzo4-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesSusan Sugar / Christine Menke vs Kelli Elsea / Tayler Blake0-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesAmber Scott / Shelly Savan vs Jennifer Mihalich / Mary Homoelle2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2024-06-13vs Elysium 1Lost 03
L#1 DoublesAlyson Thompson / Diane Zieg vs Melissa Grether / Christie Heinlen2-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 DoublesAmber Scott / Heather Evans vs Danielle Halligan / Michelle Wright2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJill Mizer / Amy Bechtel vs Wendy Mikola / Amanda Mathis1-6, 4-6
2024-06-06vs Wickertree 2Lost 03
L#1 DoublesMichelle Yoakam / Julie Gruss vs Grace Ukairo / Shannon Girardi4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesDiane Zieg / Shelly Krauss vs Susan Denny / Chandra Panley0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAMY CORNA / Sarah John vs Lily Duan / Kathy Loken5-7, 2-4
2024-05-30vs Elysium 2Won 30
W#1 DoublesAlison Scott / Amber Scott vs Michelle Funge / Randi Rasar6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesJill Mizer / Diane MacDonald vs Jeanie Chon / MaryChris Williams6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesSusan Sugar / Kelly Stoeckinger vs Mary Sampsel / Jackie Berendt6-3, 6-2
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 · Summer 7.5W Combo
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Elysium 18123414186
2Wickertree 254171024234
3Scioto CC54111634256
4Wickertree 13691839274
5Elysium 21852247286

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 3.36 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.

3.80
Judy Barbao
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.75
Danielle Milliken
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.69
Jill Mizer
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.66
Alyson Thompson
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.55
Susan Sugar
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.45
Amber Scott
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.35
Sarah John
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.34
Diane MacDonald
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.28
Leah Wagenbrenner
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.27
Katrina Ruscilli
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
AMY CORNA
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Aimee White
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Colleen Powers
published 3.5
Diane Zieg
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.18
Julie Gruss
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.14
Lis McNealey Spaine
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.12
Christine Menke
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.11
Marcy Schoedinger
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.10
Tiffany Lhota
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.90
Amy Bechtel
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Kelly Stoeckinger
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Michelle Yoakam
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Sarah Hatcher
published
Shelly Krauss
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Shelly Savan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Sarah John + Diane MacDonald5259% games+6.5% vs expected
Danielle Milliken + Alyson Thompson5165% games+4.7% vs expected
Jill Mizer + Alyson Thompson441458% games+3.5% vs expected
Julie Gruss + Marcy Schoedinger5451% games+2.6% vs expected
Alyson Thompson + Sarah Hatcher4156% games+2.6% vs expected
Diane MacDonald + Marcy Schoedinger8456% games+2.4% vs expected
Julie Gruss + Leah Wagenbrenner2449% games+0.9% vs expected
Julie Gruss + Diane MacDonald2647% games−1.7% 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.

Judy Barbao
185W–84L career · 2 lines in 2024
2%91%7%
3.80
4
Danielle Milliken
125W–82L career · 5 lines in 2024
4%93%4%
3.75
Jill Mizer
75W–45L career · 4 lines in 2024
8%90%1%
3.69
4
Alyson Thompson
80W–41L career · 6 lines in 2024
13%87%1%
3.66
Susan Sugar
102W–139L career · 3 lines in 2024
37%63%<1%
3.55
4
Amber Scott
93W–68L career · 5 lines in 2024
63%37%<1%
3.45
Sarah John
79W–37L career · 1 line in 2024
1%86%13%
3.35
3.5
Diane MacDonald
39W–24L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%87%13%
3.34
Leah Wagenbrenner
48W–40L career · 1 line in 2024
2%92%5%
3.28
Katrina Ruscilli
34W–28L career · 1 line in 2024
3%92%5%
3.27
3.5
AMY CORNA
18W–20L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Aimee White
24W–29L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Colleen Powers
7W–10L career · type S · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Diane Zieg
47W–58L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Julie Gruss
46W–54L career · 3 lines in 2024
10%89%1%
3.18
Lis McNealey Spaine
47W–43L career · 1 line in 2024
15%84%1%
3.14
3.5
Christine Menke
37W–33L career · 1 line in 2024
19%81%<1%
3.12
Marcy Schoedinger
45W–42L career · 1 line in 2024
21%79%<1%
3.11
Tiffany Lhota
79W–53L career · 1 line in 2024
24%76%<1%
3.10
3
Amy Bechtel
43W–56L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%76%24%
2.90
Kelly Stoeckinger
4W–3L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Michelle Yoakam
1W–2L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Sarah Hatcher
91W–25L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Shelly Krauss
62W–75L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Shelly Savan
3W–4L career · 2 lines in 2024
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.