Teams

NITA F 75CWc Challenge Fitness (KennedyMullady)

2022 NITA4 Fall Combo · NITA Fall 7.5 Combo Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
2022-12-18vs NITA F 75CWa TAM (Farinas)Lost 12
W#1 DoublesZagorka James / Catherine Wasylenko vs Courtney Tornow / Marjorie Baltazar6-7, 3-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesBecky Sharp / Susan Papiernik vs Jean Soh / Denise Lam2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesCochita Jose / Linda Kennedy vs Rebecca Daly / Rochelle Probst1-6, 2-6
2022-12-16Won 20
W#2 DoublesLori Egner / Cindy Monahan vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesEileen Gillstrom / Allycn Grcevic vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-12-11vs NITA F 75CWb Five Star (Delgrosso)Lost 02
L#1 DoublesCochita Jose / Jessica Urban vs Erika Baka / Dorothy OMalley1-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesMara Morris / Becky Sharp vs Claire Ralphs / Amy Harper6-7, 2-6
W#1 DoublesZagorka James / Catherine Wasylenko vs Lori Mills / Erika Baka3-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJessica Urban / Cochita Jose vs Erin Crist / Jessica Baechle6-3, 4-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesEileen Gillstrom / Becky Sharp vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#1 DoublesZagorka James / Catherine Wasylenko vs Robin Dickerson / Dorothy OMalley6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesCochita Jose / Jessica Urban vs Erin Crist / Tracey Rubach6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesSusan Papiernik / Lori Egner vs Marjorie Bogdalek / Lori Toney6-7, 2-6
2022-11-11Won 30
W#1 DoublesCatherine Wasylenko / Zagorka James vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesEileen Gillstrom / Allycn Grcevic vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesSylvia Loo / Susan Papiernik vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-10-30vs NITA F 75CWa TAM (Farinas)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesCatherine Wasylenko / Allycn Grcevic vs Sophia Koliatsis / Huan Chang4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesMara Morris / Susan Papiernik vs Martha Davis / Jennifer Peck2-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesCindy Monahan / Becky Sharp vs Courtney Tornow / Fra Angelica Farinas- Wright6-4, 4-6, 0-1
W#1 DoublesAllycn Grcevic / Catherine Wasylenko vs Valerie Nagel / Ella Lord6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesSylvia Loo / Eileen Gillstrom vs Linda Ludwig / Lisa Zanke3-6, 1-6
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 Fall 7.5 Combo Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA F 75CWa TAM (Farinas)8121616165
2NITA F 75CWc Challenge Fitness (KennedyMullady)54141329199
3NITA F 75CWb Five Star (Delgrosso)36141328225
4NITA F 75CWd Norris Center (Prendergast/Sleezer)2752247296

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 3.14 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.

3.68
Catherine Wasylenko
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.47
Zagorka James
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.28
Allycn Grcevic
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.24
Cindy Monahan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.16
Eileen Gillstrom
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.08
Becky Sharp
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.88
Sylvia Loo
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.76
Sharon Maniscalo
published
2.67
Cochita Jose
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
Jessica Urban
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Mara Morris
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Papiernik
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Suzy Palmer
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.

Allycn Grcevic + Eileen Gillstrom8265% games+24.5% vs expected
Catherine Wasylenko + Allycn Grcevic8653% games+9.8% vs expected
Cindy Monahan + Eileen Gillstrom7355% games+6.4% vs expected
Zagorka James + Catherine Wasylenko16656% games+4.5% vs expected
Zagorka James + Allycn Grcevic11751% games+0.4% vs expected
Zagorka James + Becky Sharp6550% games−0.6% vs expected
Allycn Grcevic + Becky Sharp3643% games−4.3% vs expected
Cochita Jose + Jessica Urban4545% 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
Catherine Wasylenko
102W–88L career · 6 lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.68
4
Zagorka James
290W–179L career · 4 lines in 2022
60%40%<1%
3.47
3.5
Allycn Grcevic
148W–127L career · 4 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.28
3.5
Cindy Monahan
71W–86L career · 2 lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Eileen Gillstrom
43W–60L career · 4 lines in 2022
11%88%<1%
3.16
3.5
Becky Sharp
89W–152L career · 3 lines in 2022
26%74%<1%
3.08
3
Sylvia Loo
48W–92L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%81%19%
2.88
Sharon Maniscalo
6W–27L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%3%
2.76
3
Cochita Jose
25W–82L career · 4 lines in 2022
10%90%1%
2.67
Jessica Urban
15W–16L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Mara Morris
21W–36L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Papiernik
22W–53L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Suzy Palmer
9W–7L career · no 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.