Teams

WI Combo MALT 7.5 W Neukirch

2022 WI Combo · WI Combo 7.5 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.75 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-10-10vs WI Combo MALT 7.5 W ArmitageSplit 11
L#1 DoublesKimberly Rufenacht / Joni Messner vs Samantha Saetang / Abbey Fuszard4-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesJane White / Lanie Sabin vs Kristin Bohl / Ginny Quirk6-4, 6-4
2022-10-03vs WI Combo MALT 7.5 W BollesLost 02
L#1 DoublesMorgan Counts / Kerry Ostreng vs Angela Ridgely / Niki Jones6-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesCandice DeJarlais / Foluke Otitoju vs Juliana Hahn / Aneta Kosturova2-6, 4-6
2022-09-21vs WI Combo MALT 7.5 W BollesSplit 11
L#2 DoublesKimberly Rufenacht / Joni Messner vs Kelsey Erickson / Abby Eddy0-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesCaitlin Cleary / Candice DeJarlais vs Tessa Brown / Linda Bolles6-0, 6-0
2022-09-19vs WI Combo MALT 7.5 W ArmitageLost 12
W#1 DoublesKerry Ostreng / Morgan Counts vs Lynn Armitage / Tera Gigot6-1, 6-3
L#2 DoublesBekki Roggensack / Foluke Otitoju vs Amberlee Baugus / Gillian Drier1-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesLanie Sabin / Caitlin Cleary vs Elizabeth Murphy / Kristin Bohl2-6, 3-6
2022-09-13vs WI Combo MALT 7.5 W ArmitageLost 02
L#1 DoublesMorgan Counts / Kerry Ostreng vs Sydney Verbauwhede / Abbey Fuszard4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesKaren Grimmer / Lanie Sabin vs Gillian Drier / Tera Gigot6-1, 4-6, 0-1
2022-08-22vs WI Combo Mxd MALT 7.5 ArmitageLost 02
L#1 DoublesFoluke Otitoju / Cori Olson vs Sydney Verbauwhede / Abbey Fuszard1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesKaren Grimmer / Candice DeJarlais vs Gillian Drier / Amberlee Baugus6-4, 4-6, 0-1
2022-08-16vs WI Combo MALT 7.5 W BollesWon 21
W#1 DoublesBekki Roggensack / Foluke Otitoju vs Abby Eddy / Niki Jones6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesJoni Messner / Kimberly Rufenacht vs Rebecca Gerothanas / Juliana Hahn3-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesLanie Sabin / Caitlin Cleary vs Allison O'Connor / Emily Boyd6-4, 6-3
2022-08-15vs WI Combo MALT 7.5 W BollesLost 12
L#1 DoublesKimberly Rufenacht / Jane White vs Niki Jones / Aneta Kosturova0-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesDiane Neukirch / Foluke Otitoju vs Lauren Sperstad / Haley Reynolds1-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesCaitlin Cleary / Cori Olson vs Emily Boyd / Kelsey Erickson3-6, 6-4, 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 standings for WI Combo 7.5 Women 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 3.45 estimated across 8 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
Caitlin Cleary
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
Diane Neukirch
usually #2 Doubles 62%, also #3 Doubles 31% · published 4
3.72
Foluke Otitoju
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published 4
3.46
Karen Grimmer
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.42
Candice DeJarlais
usually #3 Doubles 62%, also #1 Doubles 23% · published 3.5
3.37
Kerry Ostreng
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published
3.37
Christine Fields
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.28
Kimberly Rufenacht
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.16
Bekki Roggensack
usually #2 Doubles 47%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
Cori Olson
published
Jane White
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Lanie Sabin
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published
Morgan Counts
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · 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.

Bekki Roggensack + Candice DeJarlais151753% games+3.1% vs expected
Diane Neukirch + Bekki Roggensack251554% games−0.4% vs expected
Karen Grimmer + Candice DeJarlais0636% games−1.3% vs expected
Karen Grimmer + Kimberly Rufenacht61343% games−4.9% vs expected
Diane Neukirch + Candice DeJarlais3252% gamesnot enough data
Caitlin Cleary + Candice DeJarlais4164% gamesnot enough data
Karen Grimmer + Bekki Roggensack224 matchesnot enough data
Karen Grimmer + Diane Neukirch123 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.

4
Caitlin Cleary
63W–48L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.80
4
Diane Neukirch
178W–89L career · 13 lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Foluke Otitoju
117W–87L career · 9 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.72
Karen Grimmer
53W–94L career · 8 lines in 2022
<1%61%39%
3.46
3.5
Candice DeJarlais
219W–148L career · 13 lines in 2022
<1%74%26%
3.42
Kerry Ostreng
71W–52L career · 8 lines in 2022
<1%84%15%
3.37
3.5
Christine Fields
41W–25L career · type S · 12 lines in 2022
<1%85%15%
3.37
Kimberly Rufenacht
39W–70L career · 4 lines in 2022
95%5%<1%
3.28
3.5
Bekki Roggensack
101W–88L career · 15 lines in 2022
10%89%<1%
3.16
Cori Olson
4W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Jane White
19W–18L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Lanie Sabin
70W–53L career · 8 lines in 2022
not enough data
Morgan Counts
30W–9L career · 6 lines in 2022
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.