Teams

NITA F TLW45b Score-Knutte/Krstev

2025 NITA4 Fall Tri Level 18&O · NITA Fall Tri Level Women 3.5

16 players · average NTRP 4.19 / NORTHERN ILLINOIS

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
2025-10-26vs NITA F TLW45c Glenview-BaltazarWon 20
W#1 DoublesRebecca Bosack / Carole Wittemann vs Emily Doyle / Erin Kramer - *6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCindy Bielik / Jennifer Burnette vs Elizabeth Burns / Haina Shin6-2, 6-1
L#1 DoublesRebecca Bosack / Jennifer McClelland vs Ayano Nakamura / Corinn Hanson4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesLaurie Knutte / Cindy Bielik vs Jennifer Langtry / Kristine Jurczyk3-6, 2-6
W#1 DoublesAyah Kamel / Carole Wittemann vs Mary Therese Lee / Ayano Nakamura3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMEREDITH BETTCHER / Jill Odenbeck vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#3 DoublesJessica Arnold / Bridget Hobbs vs Kim Kuwabara / Denise Lam2-6, 4-6
2025-10-12vs NITA F TLW45c Glenview-BaltazarLost 12
L#1 DoublesRachel Corrough / Jennifer McClelland vs Christine Campanelli / Michelle Lee7-5, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMEREDITH BETTCHER / Elizabeth Huffman vs Elizabeth Burns / Susan Klumpner6-0
L#3 DoublesBridget Hobbs / Margaret Weiss vs Naomi Fujimoto / Alia Zander3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#1 DoublesJennifer McClelland / Rachel Corrough vs Heather Mixon / Taya Zoubareva6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesLaurie Knutte / Elizabeth Huffman vs Dawn Baumann / Jessica Wagner6-3, 6-2
2025-09-06vs NITA F TLW45c Glenview-BaltazarWon 20
W#1 DoublesAyah Kamel / Carole Wittemann vs Emily Doyle / Christine Campanelli7-6, 4-1
W#2 DoublesLaurie Knutte / Jill Odenbeck vs Jean Soh / Haina Shin6-4, 5-7, 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 standings3 teams · NITA Fall Tri Level Women 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA F TLW45b Score-Knutte/Krstev4213512116
2NITA F TLW45a Schaumburg-Wright/Nakamura429919155
3NITA F TLW45c Glenview-Baltazar1551329194

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 4.01 estimated across 13 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.

4.41
Carole Wittemann
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.36
Rachel Corrough
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.31
Ayah Kamel
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.26
Jennifer McClelland
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.13
Elizabeth Huffman
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
4.06
Cindy Bielik
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
4.01
Rebecca Bosack
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.94
Jill Odenbeck
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.91
Laurie Knutte
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.89
MEREDITH BETTCHER
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.65
Leigh Champagne
published
3.65
Janet Wolf
published
3.58
Margaret Weiss
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Bridget Hobbs
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Jennifer Burnette
published
Jessica Arnold
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.

Cindy Bielik + Jennifer McClelland11163% games+17.7% vs expected
Janet Wolf + Ayah Kamel8356% games+16.8% vs expected
Janet Wolf + Jennifer McClelland4356% games+14.5% vs expected
Jennifer McClelland + Rachel Corrough9264% games+11.8% vs expected
Janet Wolf + Cindy Bielik7162% games+10.8% vs expected
Laurie Knutte + MEREDITH BETTCHER9065% games+8.4% vs expected
Cindy Bielik + Ayah Kamel9261% games+7.8% vs expected
Cindy Bielik + Jill Odenbeck3457% games+7.5% vs expected
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.

4.5
Carole Wittemann
81W–36L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%75%25%
4.41
4.5
Rachel Corrough
131W–72L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%84%16%
4.36
4.5
Ayah Kamel
149W–78L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
4.31
Jennifer McClelland
98W–56L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
4.26
Elizabeth Huffman
88W–49L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%17%83%
4.13
4
Cindy Bielik
202W–83L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%33%67%
4.06
4.5
Rebecca Bosack
118W–46L career · 2 lines in 2025
47%53%<1%
4.01
4
Jill Odenbeck
193W–62L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%67%33%
3.94
4
Laurie Knutte
255W–121L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
3.91
MEREDITH BETTCHER
69W–32L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%<1%>99%
3.89
Leigh Champagne
64W–28L career · no lines in 2025
<1%14%86%
3.65
Janet Wolf
119W–71L career · no lines in 2025
<1%14%86%
3.65
Margaret Weiss
83W–41L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%29%71%
3.58
3.5
Bridget Hobbs
21W–25L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jennifer Burnette
6W–2L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Jessica Arnold
31W–6L 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.