Teams

LFW:Wayland:Ellenbogen

2022 EMA Tri Level Fall 2022 · 3.5W

5 players · average NTRP 3.00 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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 →
Schedule8 played
2022-11-27vs LFW:Wayland:Williams/FordianiWon 10
W#1 DoublesJulie Ellenbogen / Laura Lenehan vs Rita Fordiani / Sandra Mario-Williams0-6, 6-3, 1-0
2022-11-13vs LTC:Lexington TC:Miller/WeidmanLost 01
L#1 DoublesPatricia O'Hagan / Jodi Tucker vs Kate Miller / Lisa Cacciabaudo2-6, 3-6
2022-10-23vs WAY:Wayside:Pulnik/BurriLost 01
L#1 DoublesLaura Lenehan / Jodi Tucker vs Katherine Burri / Kim Pulnik3-6, 6-1, 0-1
2022-10-16vs LFW:Wayland:AckerleyLost 01
L#1 DoublesJulie Ellenbogen / Ann O'Rourke vs Jeanne Ackerley / Marsha Beatrice4-6, 6-4, 0-1
2022-10-10vs LFW:Wayland:Williams/FordianiLost 01
L#1 DoublesAnn O'Rourke / Laura Lenehan vs Marcy Buckler / Anne Kottler7-6, 1-3, 1-0
2022-10-09vs LTC:Lexington TC:Miller/WeidmanWon 10
W#1 DoublesJulie Ellenbogen / Jodi Tucker vs Lisa Cacciabaudo / Meg McCauley6-4, 7-6
2022-09-18vs WAY:Wayside:Pulnik/BurriLost 01
L#1 DoublesJulie Ellenbogen / Ann O'Rourke vs Alison Corton / Robin Logan6-1, 4-6, 0-1
2022-09-11vs LFW:Wayland:AckerleyWon 10
W#1 DoublesJulie Ellenbogen / Laura Lenehan vs Claudia Buser / Kexi Shang6-4, 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 standings9 teams · 3.5W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WAY:Wayside Green:ABC:Cortazio8181349
2LFW:Wayland:Williams/Fordiani6262555
3WAY:Wayside:Pulnik/Burri6262670
4PAX;Ms. Hits:Rogers5454976
5LTC:Lexington TC:Miller/Weidman4444977
6LFW:Wayland:Ellenbogen35351174
7WESB:Llaministas;Nichols/Sullivan-Kreiss363614100
8PAX:Paxton:O'Connor27271492
9LFW:Wayland:Ackerley17171592

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 3.00 estimated across 3 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
Patricia O'Hagan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.86
Jodi Tucker
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.79
Ann O'Rourke
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
Julie Ellenbogen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Laura Lenehan
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.

Julie Ellenbogen + Laura Lenehan7157% games+7.3% 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.

Patricia O'Hagan
81W–41L career · 1 line in 2022
<1%89%10%
3.34
Jodi Tucker
35W–40L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%85%15%
2.86
3
Ann O'Rourke
34W–28L career · 3 lines in 2022
1%93%5%
2.79
Julie Ellenbogen
15W–20L career · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
Laura Lenehan
25W–11L career · 4 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.