Teams

FD 7.0 MV2 Jolibois

2025 NEOTA Fusion Doubles · NEOTA 18&O 7.0 Fusion Doubles

16 players · average NTRP 3.40 / NORTHEASTERN OHIO

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 →
Flight standings13 teams · NEOTA 18&O 7.0 Fusion Doubles
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1FD 7.0 LT Fiedler902439166
2FD 7.0 NC1 Bullach9023410152
3FD 7.0 MM1 Mei7120411158
4FD 7.0 MV1 Connell53141024198
5FD 7.0 NC2 Williams54161124210
6FD 7.0 PM2 Nita54151232245
7FD 7.0 AO Pecko4491536242
8FD 7.0 CC Meisenbach45141332257
9FD 7.0 BR Timken45101738271
10FD 7.0 MV2 Jolibois35121226181
11FD 7.0 MM2 Wachspress1751938239
12FD 7.0 PM1 Leohr0942347296
13FD 7.0 TP Voris0922552310

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 3.38 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.

3.68
Janeen Miklowski
published
3.66
Marisa Fiucci Rosen
published
3.60
Erica Wigton
published 3.5
3.51
Karen Cipriani
published
3.43
Chipo Jolibois
published 3.5
3.41
Yuri Borsch
published
3.38
Lisa Bockhoff
published
3.37
Preet Kang
published
3.37
Nicholas Fasola
published
3.35
Ki Mixon
published
3.34
Krishna Neelakanta
published
3.33
Cyrus Bazljoo
published 3.5
3.31
Alexios Marountas
published 3.5
3.29
Lishan Zhang
published
3.11
Tasha Mixon
published
3.00
George Raguz
published 3
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.

Chipo Jolibois + Lishan Zhang3742% games+1.9% vs expected
Cyrus Bazljoo + Alexios Marountas5258% games+1.1% vs expected
Janeen Miklowski + Chipo Jolibois3250% games−0.2% vs expected
Lishan Zhang + Lisa Bockhoff4745% games−2.2% vs expected
Cyrus Bazljoo + Nicholas Fasola4152% gamesnot enough data
Karen Cipriani + Chipo Jolibois314 matchesnot enough data
Cyrus Bazljoo + Yuri Borsch224 matchesnot enough data
Yuri Borsch + Krishna Neelakanta044 matchesnot 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.

Janeen Miklowski
77W–90L career · no lines in 2025
8%91%1%
3.68
Marisa Fiucci Rosen
61W–59L career · no lines in 2025
11%88%<1%
3.66
3.5
Erica Wigton
45W–28L career · no lines in 2025
<1%23%77%
3.60
Karen Cipriani
86W–70L career · no lines in 2025
<1%46%54%
3.51
3.5
Chipo Jolibois
85W–57L career · no lines in 2025
<1%69%31%
3.43
Yuri Borsch
109W–81L career · no lines in 2025
<1%76%23%
3.41
Lisa Bockhoff
30W–45L career · no lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.38
Preet Kang
43W–55L career · no lines in 2025
<1%83%16%
3.37
Nicholas Fasola
108W–66L career · no lines in 2025
<1%84%16%
3.37
Ki Mixon
62W–41L career · no lines in 2025
<1%87%13%
3.35
Krishna Neelakanta
32W–52L career · no lines in 2025
<1%89%10%
3.34
3.5
Cyrus Bazljoo
67W–61L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%10%
3.33
3.5
Alexios Marountas
26W–18L career · no lines in 2025
1%92%8%
3.31
Lishan Zhang
132W–84L career · no lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.29
Tasha Mixon
44W–67L career · no lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.11
3
George Raguz
69W–41L career · no lines in 2025
<1%50%50%
3.00

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.