Teams

CDTA W 55&OW7.0 4.Gnbk Edidin Sat 5 $25

CDTA 1Winter 55 & over W · E

15 players · average NTRP 3.29 / CHICAGO

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 →
Schedule7 played
W#1 DoublesValerie Anderson / Robin Meister vs Elizabeth David / Beverly Patt3-6, 6-0, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSarah W Johnson / Donna Salvatore vs Michele Canar / Lori Lamey4-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesCathy Lundstrom / Cynthia Rowe vs Mary Hanrahan / Linda DeNardis3-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesDonna Salvatore / Sarah W Johnson vs Diane Egan / Vina Maniquis0-6, 7-6
L#2 DoublesJennifer Cicciu / Anne Lewis vs Linda Meyer / Lynn Meyer3-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesBarbara Chmieleski / Cynthia Rowe vs Elisa Zusman / Rosemary Wheeler1-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesRobin Meister / Susan Walsh vs Lucie Kreidler / Alja Hessami-Maas3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesCynthia Rowe / Jennifer Cicciu vs Sharon Kerr-Zygmunt / Marie Dillon2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesSheila Weinberg / Jennifer Cicciu vs Stephanie Batka / Kimberly Kirtley7-5, 4-2
L#3 DoublesSarah W Johnson / Anne Lewis vs Tece Hendrickson / Michele Locascio6-7, 2-3
L#1 DoublesSheila Weinberg / Barbara Chmieleski vs Masayo Kobashi / Chris Nelson2-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesSusan Walsh / Robin Meister vs Janet Frigo / Maribeth Corbett6-3, 5-1
L#2 DoublesAnne Lewis / Donna Salvatore vs Magdalena Galinska / Irene Salerno1-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesRobin Meister / Cynthia Rowe vs Svetlana Kanev / Kelly Matthews-Pluta1-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesCate Brodner / Robin Meister vs Mitzi Kastner / Margo Carvell2-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesKaren Edidin / Cathy Lundstrom vs Lara Phillips / Tina Schauls1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesSheila Weinberg / Valerie Anderson vs Mya Murata / Peggy Schwerman4-6, 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 standings9 teams · E
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA W 55&OW7.0 5.Tam Corey Fri 7:30 $227018310130
2CDTA W 55&OW7.0 6.Tam Grabow Sun 1 $226117415164
3CDTA W 55&OW7.0 9.RCLB Eichner Sun 6 $225215619165
4CDTA W 55&OW7.0 7.STP Howell Sun 1 $223491224185
5CDTA W 55&OW7.0 2.Naper Bianchi Fri 7:30 $243491225191
6CDTA W 55&OW7.0 3.Herit Hanrahan Sat 2 $253471433221
7CDTA W 55&OW7.0 8.Wlmt Ellison Sat 5 $251661532195
8DROPPED W 55&OW7.0 1.MTC Brown Fri 7 $33.5000000
9CDTA W 55&OW7.0 4.Gnbk Edidin Sat 5 $250731836230

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 2.89 estimated across 9 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.

3.25
Cate Brodner
published 3.5
3.17
Jennifer Cicciu
published 3.5
3.11
Barbara Chmieleski
published 3.5
3.03
Anne Lewis
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
3.01
Sarah W Johnson
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.81
Rosie Weaver
published 3.5
2.68
Michelle Michaels
published
2.52
Cathy Lundstrom
published 3
2.44
Cynthia Rowe
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Donna Salvatore
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Helen Kim
published
Karen Edidin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Robin Meister
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
Sheila Weinberg
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Valerie Anderson
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 W Johnson + Barbara Chmieleski4343% games+5.0% vs expected
Cate Brodner + Sarah W Johnson211153% games+3.1% vs expected
Cate Brodner + Jennifer Cicciu3546% games+1.3% vs expected
Jennifer Cicciu + Anne Lewis2641% games−1.0% vs expected
Cate Brodner + Donna Salvatore51638% gamesnot enough data
Jennifer Cicciu + Sheila Weinberg101054% gamesnot enough data
Rosie Weaver + Sheila Weinberg6549% gamesnot enough data
Sarah W Johnson + Donna Salvatore2841% 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.

3.5
Cate Brodner
96W–153L career · no lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.25
3.5
Jennifer Cicciu
34W–67L career · no lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.17
3.5
Barbara Chmieleski
60W–158L career · no lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.11
3
Anne Lewis
60W–80L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%42%58%
3.03
Sarah W Johnson
86W–127L career · 3 lines in 2026
47%53%<1%
3.01
3.5
Rosie Weaver
31W–50L career · type S · no lines in 2026
91%9%<1%
2.81
Michelle Michaels
36W–45L career · no lines in 2026
10%89%1%
2.68
3
Cathy Lundstrom
33W–36L career · no lines in 2026
46%54%<1%
2.52
3
Cynthia Rowe
34W–93L career · 4 lines in 2026
67%33%<1%
2.44
Donna Salvatore
12W–100L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Helen Kim
0W–14L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Karen Edidin
6W–25L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Robin Meister
12W–27L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sheila Weinberg
22W–40L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Valerie Anderson
12W–21L career · no lines in 2026
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.