Teams

Northern: Amico (10.0)

2023 18&Over Mixed · 10.0

10 players · average NTRP 4.80 / NORTHERN REGION

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 →
Schedule4 played
2023-05-20Won 10
W#2 DoublesBrian Bowman / Cathryn Crummey vs Tristan Wise / Ann Phillips7-5, 7-6
2023-05-09vs Davis / Clay 10.0Won 10
W#1 DoublesBrian Bowman / Cathryn Crummey vs Tristan Wise / Natalie Weaver6-4, 6-3
2023-05-08Won 10
W#1 DoublesBrian Bowman / Nora Breen vs Shelley Brahler / William Brahler5-7, 6-2, 1-0
2023-05-07vs Davis / Clay 10.0Won 10
W#1 DoublesArjun Ramakrishnan / Cathryn Crummey vs Tristan Wise / Natalie Weaver6-2, 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 standings for 10.0 have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 4.43 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.

Cathryn Crummey
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 5
4.72
Arjun Ramakrishnan
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 5
4.46
Zoe Chodak
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
David Maher
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4.5
Isabel van der Veen
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4.5
4.12
Brian Bowman
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 5
Michael Amico
usually #1 Doubles 82%, also #3 Doubles 18% · published
Nora Breen
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
Susan Bernardi
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Thomas Bain
usually #2 Doubles 71%, also #1 Doubles 14% · 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.

Nora Breen + Thomas Bain3256% gamesnot enough data
David Maher + Isabel van der Veen4159% gamesnot enough data
Isabel van der Veen + Thomas Bain213 matchesnot 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.

5
Cathryn Crummey
13W–5L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
5
Arjun Ramakrishnan
38W–9L career · 6 lines in 2023
5%94%2%
4.72
Zoe Chodak
19W–6L career · 5 lines in 2023
62%38%<1%
4.46
4.5
David Maher
22W–9L career · type M · 8 lines in 2023
not enough data
4.5
Isabel van der Veen
12W–9L career · 5 lines in 2023
not enough data
5
Brian Bowman
41W–20L career · 3 lines in 2023
>99%<1%<1%
4.12
Michael Amico
50W–19L career · 11 lines in 2023
not enough data
Nora Breen
41W–17L career · 6 lines in 2023
not enough data
Susan Bernardi
33W–18L career · 6 lines in 2023
not enough data
Thomas Bain
65W–18L career · 7 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.