Teams

Tri-Level Women Kapuscinski-SVC

2023 USTA League Tennis Tri-Level Doubles NWO · 18&Over Women Trii-level 3.5, 4.0, 4.5

11 players · average NTRP 3.89 / NORTHWESTERN OHIO

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
2023-02-12vs Tri-Level Women Bastas- TWOSLost 03
L#1 DoublesSamantha LaPointe / Margaret Cahill vs Melissa Hill / Kimberly Pacella2-6, 3-5
L#2 DoublesEmily Nixon / Sarah Ward vs Amber Copa / Theresa Vietmeier3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesAmy Graff / Wendy Poitinger vs Selin Bastas / Shawna Dippman0-6, 6-7
2023-02-05vs Tri-Level Women Smith-PTCLost 12
L#1 DoublesNancy Rumpf / Kerrie Denman vs Hilary Hayden / Gemma Smith6-4, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDenise Nisbett / Sarah Ward vs Brenda Irwin / Lisa Evans7-5, 2-0
L#3 DoublesAmy Graff / Wendy Poitinger vs Canan Myers / Mandy Ray7-6, 0-2, 1-0
2023-01-29vs Tri-Level Women Lucas/KuyamaWon 21
W#1 DoublesNancy Rumpf / Denise Nisbett vs Jennifer Abell / Kendra Spears2-6, 5-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSamantha LaPointe / Sarah Ward vs Lyndsey Lucas / Rachael McEwen4-6, 5-6
W#3 DoublesWendy Poitinger / Amy Graff vs Debra Bloomquist / Brenda Scott6-3, 6-3
2023-01-22vs Tri-Level Women Bastas- TWOSLost 12
W#1 DoublesKerrie Denman / Nancy Rumpf vs Melissa Hill / Theresa Vietmeier6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesEmily Nixon / Denise Nisbett vs Amber Copa / Julieann Campbell4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesJackie Kapuscinski / Wendy Poitinger vs Shawna Dippman / Jennifer Zinz2-6, 2-6
2023-01-15vs Tri-Level Women Smith-PTCWon 21
W#1 DoublesMargaret Cahill / Denise Nisbett vs Gemma Smith / Amanda Smith0-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesEmily Nixon / Samantha LaPointe vs Hilary Hayden / Brenda Irwin7-6, 0-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesVictoria Watson / Amy Graff vs Canan Myers / Lisa Evans6-4, 4-2
2023-01-08vs Tri-Level Women Lucas/KuyamaWon 21
W#1 DoublesMargaret Cahill / Kerrie Denman vs Jennifer Abell / Kendra Spears6-2, 3-5, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSamantha LaPointe / Victoria Watson vs Lyndsey Lucas / Keyuko Kuyama1-6, 3-5
W#3 DoublesAmy Graff / Wendy Poitinger vs Jane Bohnlein / Brenda Scott6-3, 6-1
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 standings4 teams · 18&Over Women Trii-level 3.5, 4.0, 4.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Tri-Level Women Bastas- TWOS601627104
2Tri-Level Women Kapuscinski-SVC3381023160
3Tri-Level Women Smith-PTC3371126158
4Tri-Level Women Lucas/Kuyama0651328178

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 3.56 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.

Nancy Rumpf
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.24
Margaret Cahill
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.83
Samantha LaPointe
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.75
Denise Nisbett
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.56
Emily Nixon
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.53
Sarah Ward
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.50
Victoria Watson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.36
Wendy Poitinger
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.22
Amy Graff
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.07
Jackie Kapuscinski
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Kerrie Denman
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.

Samantha LaPointe + Emily Nixon151158% games+6.8% vs expected
Victoria Watson + Wendy Poitinger6066% games+6.2% vs expected
Samantha LaPointe + Denise Nisbett2356% games+2.4% vs expected
Samantha LaPointe + Sarah Ward9261% games+0.8% vs expected
Emily Nixon + Sarah Ward383252% games−0.5% vs expected
Emily Nixon + Wendy Poitinger6356% games−0.8% vs expected
Samantha LaPointe + Margaret Cahill4646% gamesnot enough data
Denise Nisbett + Kerrie Denman6258% 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.

4.5
Nancy Rumpf
93W–39L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
4.5
Margaret Cahill
99W–80L career · 3 lines in 2023
3%94%2%
4.24
4
Samantha LaPointe
226W–121L career · 4 lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.83
4
Denise Nisbett
126W–53L career · 4 lines in 2023
3%95%2%
3.75
4
Emily Nixon
315W–260L career · 3 lines in 2023
34%66%<1%
3.56
4
Sarah Ward
210W–176L career · 3 lines in 2023
40%60%<1%
3.53
Victoria Watson
93W–25L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%48%52%
3.50
3.5
Wendy Poitinger
261W–148L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%85%15%
3.36
3.5
Amy Graff
83W–56L career · 5 lines in 2023
5%94%2%
3.22
3
Jackie Kapuscinski
69W–75L career · type S · 1 line in 2023
<1%30%70%
3.07
Kerrie Denman
23W–21L career · 3 lines in 2023
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.