Teams

CDTA W 18&OW4.0 1.MT Bann Starkman Sun 4 $25

CDTA 2Winter 18 & Over W · E

21 players · average NTRP 3.94 / 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 →
Schedule4 played
W#3 DoublesSusan Kalina / Lisa Potash vs Lisa Hans / Susan Klumpner6-1, 6-1
L#1 DoublesDani Zepeda / Kristen Coy vs Angela Anglin Weathers / Ana Chang6-2, 6-7, 0-1
W#1 SinglesSusan Kalina vs Meghan Ahlgrim7-5, 2-3
L#3 DoublesJennifer Giertsen / Lisa Potash vs Alja Hessami-Maas / Gaelle Gravot4-6, 2-5
W#2 DoublesRosemary Wheeler / Lisa Potash vs Sarah Blankenbaker / Renee Zha6-2, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSusan Kalina / Ellen Kingsepp vs Lori Mills / Kirsten Mattingly6-2, 6-2
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 standings11 teams · E
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA A18&O 4.0W Tam Corey8128819234
2CDTA W 18&OW4.0 10.Tam Wright Fri 7:30 $2281261027250
3CDTA W 18&OW4.0 5.Heritage Chmieleski Sat 2 $2363221432271
4CDTA W 18&OW4.0 1.MT Bann Starkman Sun 4 $2554241233250
5CDTA W 18&OW4.0 2.McFetridge Lund Sat 3 $2054191737283
6CDTA W 18&OW4.0 6.Centennial Nemec Sat 3 $2045181840312
7CDTA W 18&OW4.0 7.Lakeshore Chang Sun 7 $2645122448313
8CDTA W 18&OW4.0 9.Glenbrook Gray Sun 3 $2536122451344
9CDTA W 18&OW4.0 8.Wheaton Mills Sun 4 $2018112554359
10CDTA W 18&OW4.0 4.McFetridge Newson Sat 7 $201882857357
11(zDROPPED) CDTA W 18&OW4.0 11.River Trails Miller Sat 8 $23000000

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 3.75 estimated across 18 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.

4.22
Corinn Hanson
published 4.5
4.16
Perry Mimms
published 4.5
4.02
Anna Dau
published 4
4.00
Iva Gregorova
published 4
4.00
Kristen Coy
published 4
3.98
Desiree Witte
published 4
3.83
Bela Starkman
published 4
3.75
Sheila Bondoc
published 4
Dani Zepeda
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.75
Sophia Koliatsis
published 4
3.71
Monique Melnick
published 4
3.63
Leah Starkman
published 4
3.63
Susan Kalina
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.61
Rochelle Meng
published 4
3.58
3.56
Lisa Potash
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.46
Jennifer Giertsen
published 3.5
3.33
Julie Schwan
published 3.5
3.29
Rosemary Wheeler
published 3.5
Ellen Kingsepp
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Julie Steinberg
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.

Anna Dau + Bela Starkman4357% games+12.4% vs expected
Desiree Witte + Anna Dau5257% games+10.7% vs expected
Kristen Coy + Anna Dau11164% games+8.0% vs expected
Heather Vishnubhakat + Rochelle Meng6460% games+7.3% vs expected
Bela Starkman + Rochelle Meng8458% games+7.3% vs expected
Susan Kalina + Sophia Koliatsis4264% games+6.2% vs expected
Sheila Bondoc + Desiree Witte23961% games+6.0% vs expected
Sophia Koliatsis + Leah Starkman5358% games+5.7% 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
Corinn Hanson
120W–54L career · no lines in 2024
4%94%2%
4.22
4.5
Perry Mimms
120W–59L career · no lines in 2024
11%89%<1%
4.16
4
Anna Dau
206W–99L career · no lines in 2024
<1%44%56%
4.02
4
Iva Gregorova
66W–36L career · no lines in 2024
<1%50%50%
4.00
4
Kristen Coy
127W–62L career · no lines in 2024
<1%51%49%
4.00
4
Desiree Witte
258W–188L career · no lines in 2024
<1%55%45%
3.98
4
Bela Starkman
183W–164L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%9%
3.83
4
Sheila Bondoc
117W–62L career · no lines in 2024
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Dani Zepeda
69W–56L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
4
Sophia Koliatsis
341W–195L career · no lines in 2024
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Monique Melnick
93W–91L career · no lines in 2024
5%94%1%
3.71
4
Leah Starkman
228W–152L career · no lines in 2024
15%84%<1%
3.63
Susan Kalina
52W–41L career · 3 lines in 2024
16%83%<1%
3.63
4
Rochelle Meng
184W–198L career · no lines in 2024
20%80%<1%
3.61
4
Heather Vishnubhakat
130W–98L career · no lines in 2024
27%73%<1%
3.58
Lisa Potash
67W–76L career · 3 lines in 2024
31%69%<1%
3.56
3.5
Jennifer Giertsen
110W–84L career · no lines in 2024
<1%63%37%
3.46
3.5
Julie Schwan
134W–69L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%9%
3.33
3.5
Rosemary Wheeler
162W–147L career · no lines in 2024
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Ellen Kingsepp
13W–11L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Julie Steinberg
87W–36L career · no lines in 2024
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.