Teams

Longshore Lake / Barnard

2025 Collier Mixed 40 & Over Winter · Mixed 40 7.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / REGION_7

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-03-08vs Talis Park / MaatallahSplit 11
W#2 DoublesSUE BECK / Jordan Rieks vs Barbara Hurt-Simmons / Dave Carlquist3-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMargaret Laggis / John Acosta vs Patricia Buonaiuto / Thomas Weisel5-7, 4-6
2025-03-01vs Saturnia Lakes / FischelLost 01
L#1 DoublesJohn Acosta / Mara Mazza vs Gian Fidanli / Anita Susco3-6, 2-6
2025-02-22vs Palmira / K. RodriguezWon 10
W#1 DoublesJordan Rieks / Margaret Laggis vs Susan Mannlein / Michael Adams6-4, 7-6
2025-02-08vs COLLIER/Marco YMCA / WashakWon 10
W#2 DoublesSUE BECK / Jordan Rieks vs Ricki Levine / John Moulton6-2, 6-4
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 standings for Mixed 40 7.0 have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.41 estimated across 10 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.

3.83
Massimo Bugliosi
published
3.69
Juraj Zeman
published
3.60
Natalia Zeman
published
3.58
SUE BECK
published
3.57
Jordan Rieks
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.39
John Acosta
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.38
Mara Mazza
published
3.27
Daniela de Pietto
published 3.5
Doug Clough
published 3.5
3.19
Margaret Laggis
published
2.62
Patty Branthover
published
Rick Barnard
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.

Natalia Zeman + Juraj Zeman12171% games+20.3% vs expected
Jordan Rieks + SUE BECK10074% games+18.6% vs expected
Massimo Bugliosi + Daniela de Pietto4160% gamesnot 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.

Massimo Bugliosi
28W–12L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.83
Juraj Zeman
32W–5L career · no lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.69
Natalia Zeman
46W–8L career · no lines in 2025
<1%21%79%
3.60
SUE BECK
37W–14L career · no lines in 2025
<1%26%74%
3.58
Jordan Rieks
59W–28L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%31%69%
3.57
John Acosta
13W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%80%20%
3.39
Mara Mazza
25W–16L career · no lines in 2025
<1%82%18%
3.38
3.5
Daniela de Pietto
23W–14L career · no lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Doug Clough
0W–2L career · type M · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Margaret Laggis
20W–16L career · no lines in 2025
8%92%1%
3.19
Patty Branthover
22W–46L career · no lines in 2025
18%82%<1%
2.62
Rathinivethan Kanjamalai
1W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Rick Barnard
1W–0L 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.