Teams

NITA E 35W18b Score (Michl/Moskowitz)

2022 NITA1 ESL Adult 18 & Over · NITA ESL 18 & Over 3.5 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.62 / NORTHERN ILLINOIS

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 →
Schedule7 played
W#1 DoublesRebecca Bosack / Becky Lemna vs Urszula Farry / Veronica Lidral7-6, 3-1
L#2 DoublesREBECCA SCAHILL / Carol Yeo vs Michele Canar / Deborah Holt3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJoni Sherman / Elaina OKeefe vs Tanja Boskovic / Nikki Ronstadt3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#1 DoublesDebra Bezanis / Becky Lemna vs Dimitrina Schoyer / Tanja Boskovic3-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJoni Sherman / REBECCA SCAHILL vs Michele Canar / Urszula Farry3-6, 2-6
W#1 DoublesBecky Lemna / Rebecca Bosack vs Nicole Aldridge / Kimberly Ellis6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesPatricia Kladis-Schiappa / REBECCA SCAHILL vs Sheila Bai / Susan Leitao6-3, 4-5, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLara Taylor / Elaina OKeefe vs Barbara Gordner / Lorrie Hart2-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#1 DoublesRebecca Bosack / Becky Lemna vs Nicole Borck / Brittany Armbruster6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesPatricia Kladis-Schiappa / Amy Elder vs Christina Griffith / Sheila Bai4-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesREBECCA SCAHILL / Katie Ketchum vs Barbara Gordner / Lorrie Hart6-1, 6-1
2021-09-26vs NITA E 35W18a TAM (Farinas)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesDebra Bezanis / Becky Lemna vs Mandy Shaw / Jennifer Peck6-1, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCassandra Engel / Katie Ketchum vs Julie Hahn / Marjorie Baltazar4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesCarol Yeo / Karen Hayes vs Patricia Bustamante / Michele Young4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#1 DoublesRebecca Bosack / Patricia Kladis-Schiappa vs Sheila Bai / Shelley Young6-4, 6-1
L#1 SinglesJoni Sherman vs Christina Griffith1-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesCassandra Engel / Carol Yeo vs Dorthy Carter / Brittany Armbruster6-4, 6-4
2021-09-12vs NITA E 35W18a TAM (Farinas)Lost 02
L#1 DoublesLesa Moskowitz / Katie Ketchum vs Jean Soh / Sue Lehrer2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesKimberly Michl / Joni Sherman vs Claudia Moscoso-Cordero / Leah Starkman1-6, 0-6
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 · NITA ESL 18 & Over 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA E 35W18a TAM (Farinas)7227922226
2NITA E 35W18c River Trails (Schoyer/Naughton)72251127253
3NITA E 35W18e Homewood-Flossmoor (Young/Bai)27112553360
4NITA E 35W18b Score (Michl/Moskowitz)2792756362

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 3.25 estimated across 10 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.

4.08
Rebecca Bosack
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 4.5
3.37
Katie Ketchum
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.32
Joni Sherman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.30
Lesa Moskowitz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.25
Becky Lemna
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Carol Yeo
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.24
Patricia Kladis-Schiappa
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.01
Debra Bezanis
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.00
Lara Taylor
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.00
Amy Elder
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.96
Kimberly Michl
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Cassandra Engel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Karen Hayes
usually #3 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.

Lesa Moskowitz + Patricia Kladis-Schiappa14265% games+8.8% vs expected
Lara Taylor + Carol Yeo7553% games+8.6% vs expected
Becky Lemna + Rebecca Bosack11558% games+6.3% vs expected
Lara Taylor + Debra Bezanis1450% games+5.1% vs expected
Amy Elder + Cassandra Engel6160% games+3.6% vs expected
Becky Lemna + Debra Bezanis81151% games+1.1% vs expected
Kimberly Michl + Carol Yeo5348% games−0.3% vs expected
Lara Taylor + Karen Hayes7650% games−4.6% 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
Rebecca Bosack
119W–46L career · 8 lines in 2022
28%72%<1%
4.08
3.5
Katie Ketchum
70W–66L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%84%16%
3.37
Joni Sherman
79W–88L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%91%8%
3.32
3.5
Lesa Moskowitz
134W–118L career · 1 line in 2022
1%93%6%
3.30
3.5
Becky Lemna
129W–114L career · 5 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Carol Yeo
41W–34L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Patricia Kladis-Schiappa
105W–54L career · 3 lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Debra Bezanis
37W–56L career · 2 lines in 2022
47%53%<1%
3.01
Lara Taylor
61W–94L career · 1 line in 2022
48%52%<1%
3.00
3.5
Amy Elder
38W–34L career · 1 line in 2022
49%51%<1%
3.00
Kimberly Michl
19W–48L career · 1 line in 2022
61%39%<1%
2.96
Cassandra Engel
30W–24L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Karen Hayes
29W–29L career · 1 line 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.