Teams

Baddeloo & Mullin - DMGolf

2022 IA 40 & Over Adult League · 3.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.10 / IOWA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2021-12-04vs VanVark - LifetimeLost 23
L#1 DoublesJanice Koder / Sonja Heying vs Ann Stahly / Michelle Cownie3-6, 4-6
W#1 SinglesSarah Zinn-Burggraaf vs Michele van Vark6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesTeresa Thomas / Brenda Klein vs Barbara Sedgley / Megan Beebe0-6, 3-6
L#2 SinglesAllison Hales vs Keaton Pulver0-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesKatie Ward / Michelle Mullin vs Christa Whitmer / Renee Oiler6-3, 6-2
2021-11-20vs Lu & Graf - GenesisWon 41
W#1 DoublesChristina Jarck / Janice Koder vs Jennifer Corkrean / Kathleen Lu6-4, 6-1
W#1 SinglesSarah Zinn-Burggraaf vs Corinne Goode6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesPamela Billerbeck / Teresa Thomas vs Susmita Sura / Val Hoefle7-5, 6-1
L#2 SinglesJenna Steffensmeier vs Dionne Richards1-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesCindy Baddeloo / Katie Ward vs Nicole Rourke / Shirley Weuve6-4, 6-2
2021-11-06vs Christensen & Cortese - LifetimeWon 31
W#1 DoublesSonja Heying / Christina Jarck vs Sarah Piziali / Suzanne Graves7-5, 6-3
W#1 SinglesSarah Zinn-Burggraaf vs Brenda Wiarda6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCindy Baddeloo / Jenna Steffensmeier vs Lori Hanson / Linda Wilker6-3, 6-0
L#3 DoublesJennifer Aldrich / Michelle Mullin vs Salisha Jones / Diane Cortese3-6, 2-6
2021-10-23vs Norris & Eells - ElmcrestLost 04
L#1 DoublesJanice Koder / Sonja Heying vs Nancy Netolicky / Julie Kramer4-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesGaylyn Markowski vs Anne Jasper3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesBrenda Klein / Cindy Baddeloo vs Michelle Novak / Sorina Abernathey7-6, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesMichelle Mullin vs Jennifer Kemmerer4-6, 1-6
2021-10-02vs Flander & Jenkins - NDACWon 41
L#1 DoublesChristina Jarck / Janice Koder vs Brenda Wichhart / Diana Flander5-7, 6-4, 0-1
W#1 SinglesSonja Heying vs Sonja Smith6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesCindy Baddeloo / Sharon Dinshaw vs Carla Schmidt / Penny Raia6-1, 5-7, 1-0
W#2 SinglesGaylyn Markowski vs Lisa Hammer6-4, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMichelle Mullin / Allison Hales vs Kathy Jenkins / Nichole Early6-2, 6-3
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 3.0 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 2.90 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.

3.46
Sarah Zinn-Burggraaf
usually #1 Singles 43%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.42
Sonja Heying
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
3.08
Christina Jarck
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
2.79
Michelle Mullin
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
2.77
Allison Hales
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.76
Brenda Klein
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.65
Janice Koder
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published
2.60
Cindy Baddeloo
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.55
Gaylyn Markowski
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
Jenna Steffensmeier
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Katie Ward
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Pamela Billerbeck
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Sharon Dinshaw
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Teresa Thomas
usually #2 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.

Christina Jarck + Sarah Zinn-Burggraaf2744% games+7.4% vs expected
Sarah Zinn-Burggraaf + Sonja Heying11954% games+6.4% vs expected
Cindy Baddeloo + Allison Hales4156% games+3.6% vs expected
Christina Jarck + Sonja Heying4746% games+2.5% vs expected
Janice Koder + Michelle Mullin4351% games−4.8% vs expected
Janice Koder + Cindy Baddeloo2445% games−12.4% vs expected
Pamela Billerbeck + Michelle Mullin3446% gamesnot enough data
Janice Koder + Gaylyn Markowski0540% 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.

Sarah Zinn-Burggraaf
70W–53L career · 7 lines in 2022
<1%64%36%
3.46
Sonja Heying
50W–42L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%74%26%
3.42
3.5
Christina Jarck
26W–31L career · 6 lines in 2022
26%74%<1%
3.08
Michelle Mullin
47W–49L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%93%5%
2.79
3
Allison Hales
18W–23L career · 2 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Brenda Klein
24W–22L career · 2 lines in 2022
2%95%3%
2.76
Janice Koder
29W–47L career · 6 lines in 2022
12%87%<1%
2.65
3
Cindy Baddeloo
30W–23L career · 4 lines in 2022
22%78%<1%
2.60
3
Gaylyn Markowski
16W–25L career · 2 lines in 2022
36%64%<1%
2.55
Jenna Steffensmeier
8W–10L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Katie Ward
6W–0L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Pamela Billerbeck
11W–9L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Sharon Dinshaw
20W–11L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Teresa Thomas
1W–3L career · 2 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.