Teams

GF:Dynamic Duos:Montenegro

ECT Tri Level - hold for 2025 · 3.5 Women 1

4 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SOUTHERN 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 →
Schedule6 played
2025-12-20vs MIS:Mamacitas: ColemanWon 10
W#1 DoublesLeanne Jolin / Kate Piironen vs Eileen Cosgriff / Kathy Calnen6-0, 6-3
2025-12-13vs OSRC:Net Setters:SearleLost 01
L#1 DoublesCatherine Dinauer / Leanne Jolin vs Kathryn Hanly / Meghan Trausch6-7, 2-6
2025-11-23vs MIS:Mamacitas: ColemanWon 10
W#1 DoublesDeborah Montenegro / Leanne Jolin vs Lisa Marie Coleman / Eileen Cosgriff6-4, 6-2
2025-11-22vs GF:3.5 Tri-Level:EhlertLost 01
L#1 DoublesCatherine Dinauer / Deborah Montenegro vs Maureen Goodrich / Laura LaCascia-Ehlert5-7, 5-4
2025-11-15vs OSRC:Net Setters:SearleLost 01
L#1 DoublesDeborah Montenegro / Kate Piironen vs Amy Searle / Kathryn Hanly2-6, 6-2, 0-1
2025-11-02vs GF:3.5 Tri-Level:EhlertWon 10
W#1 DoublesCatherine Dinauer / Kate Piironen vs Maureen Goodrich / Debbie Kelly6-2, 2-6, 1-0
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 standings4 teams · 3.5 Women 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1OSRC:Net Setters:Searle0651441
2GF:3.5 Tri-Level:Ehlert0632549
3GF:Dynamic Duos:Montenegro0632650
4MIS:Mamacitas: Coleman06061273

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 3.23 estimated across 4 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.

3.34
Catherine Dinauer
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.33
Kate Piironen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.17
Deborah Montenegro
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.10
Leanne Jolin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Catherine Dinauer + Kate Piironen6163% games+6.0% vs expected
Deborah Montenegro + Kate Piironen12956% games+5.3% vs expected
Deborah Montenegro + Catherine Dinauer13656% games+2.4% vs expected
Deborah Montenegro + Leanne Jolin31047% games−13.1% vs expected
Kate Piironen + Leanne Jolin3255% gamesnot enough data
Catherine Dinauer + Leanne Jolin123 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.

3.5
Catherine Dinauer
97W–72L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%87%13%
3.34
Kate Piironen
66W–49L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Deborah Montenegro
73W–63L career · 3 lines in 2025
12%87%1%
3.17
Leanne Jolin
39W–50L career · 3 lines in 2025
24%76%<1%
3.10

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.