Teams

CON:Walsh:Blatsos

2022 NH Adult 18 & Over Women Weekend · Diva 3.0

2 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NEW HAMPSHIRE

View scouting list →
Schedule10 played
2022-01-21vs MITC:Morison:BrownLost 01
L#1 DoublesDebbie Blatsos / Suzanne Walsh vs REBECCA BROWN / Gloria Morison2-8
2022-01-21vs YMCA:Pagliuca:ZhanLost 01
L#1 DoublesDebbie Blatsos / Suzanne Walsh vs Marge Pagliuca / Ying Zhan6-8
2021-12-05vs MITC:Morison:BrownLost 01
L#1 DoublesDebbie Blatsos / Janice Leviton vs Gloria Morison / REBECCA BROWN1-6, 2-6
2021-11-14vs NPT:Lewis:DeaconLost 01
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Walsh / Debbie Blatsos vs C Lewis / Linda Arnold1-6, 4-6
2021-11-07vs EXE:Law:RichmondLost 01
L#1 DoublesJane Cremeno / Suzanne Walsh vs Shannon Richmond / Jennifer Sufat6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2021-10-31vs YMCA:Johnson:WhiteLost 01
L#2 DoublesDebbie Blatsos / Suzanne Walsh vs Lisa Capicchioni / Stephanie Murphy1-6, 7-6, 0-1
2021-10-24vs MITC:Barker:TwitchellLost 01
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Walsh / Debbie Blatsos vs Cher Barker / REBECCA BROWN3-6, 1-6
2021-10-03vs NPT:Lewis:DeaconLost 01
L#1 DoublesJane Cremeno / Debbie Blatsos vs C Lewis / Betty Ann Giles1-6, 6-4, 0-1
2021-09-26vs EXE:Bosli:TallLost 01
L#3 DoublesSuzanne Walsh / Erin Waldvogel vs Lamia Bosli / Leslie Rifkin2-6, 5-7
2021-09-19vs YMCA:Johnson:WhiteWon 10
W#2 DoublesDebbie Blatsos / Suzanne Walsh vs Lisa Capicchioni / Allison Ropes1-6, 6-4, 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 standings17 teams · Diva 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1EXE:Bosli:Tall2020010
2YMCA:Koshy:White202004
3YMCA:Herz:Sufat2020013
4MITC:Morison:Brown202003
5YMCA:Murphy:Wiechers202008
6EXE:Law:Bruno1111115
7YMCA:Gagnon:Skilton1111116
8CON:Dahme:Kugel111118
9NPT:Arnold:Truax1111113
10YMCA:Hendry:Leibig1111115
11YMCA:Willett:Chrissis1111110
12NPT:Tivnan:Lang1111116
13NPT:Lewis:Deacon0202217
14MITC:Barker:Twitchell0202217
15HH:Ries:Kluger0202217
16CON:Walsh:Blatsos0202216
17YMCA:Krasnof::Tieder0202217

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 2.42 estimated across 2 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.

2.44
Suzanne Walsh
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.40
Debbie Blatsos
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
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.

Suzanne Walsh + Debbie Blatsos132940% games−7.0% 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.

Suzanne Walsh
51W–114L career · 8 lines in 2022
69%31%<1%
2.44
3
Debbie Blatsos
29W–67L career · type A · 8 lines in 2022
79%21%<1%
2.40

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.