Teams

CDTA E 40&OW3.0 4MTC Brown2 Sun 6 $33.5

CDTA ESL 40 & Over · CDTA E 40&O Women 3.0

13 players · average NTRP 2.93 / CHICAGO

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
L#1 DoublesMariana Ingersoll / Vanessa Ruiz vs Sharon Snyder / Catherine Lange7-5, 5-6
W#1 SinglesBeata Gaska-Aniolowski vs Cherrie Han6-1, 6-0
L#2 DoublesAndee Harris / Jessica Rivas vs Jacqueline Lakely / Tara Snow3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAlly Alston / Mary Chang vs Kelleen Thut / Jacqueline Abreu6-3, 3-6, 0-1
L#1 DoublesAlly Alston / Jessica Rivas vs Samantha Garrity / Juli Theo4-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesAbbey Cullen vs Jenna Stanley1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesVanessa Ruiz / Andee Harris vs Jamie Rauscher / Jean Niemi6-7, 0-4
L#1 DoublesAndee Harris / Vanessa Ruiz vs Kelli Brinkman / Julie Budzynski2-6, 5-6
L#2 DoublesKara Levin / Ally Alston vs Simone Brown / Lisa Charpentier3-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesAnita Kim / Abbey Cullen vs Chris Henderson / Katherine Stone1-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesVanessa Ruiz / Jessica Rivas vs Jill Werts / Linda Murphy5-7, 5-1, 1-0
W#1 SinglesAnita Kim vs Stephanie Fishel6-3, 6-0
W#2 DoublesAbbey Cullen / Mary Chang vs CHRISTINE TAN / Janice Turner6-4, 4-4, 1-0
W#1 DoublesVanessa Ruiz / Andee Harris vs Molly Klein Catalano / Mandy Tandy6-0, 6-2
W#1 SinglesBeata Gaska-Aniolowski vs Neli Alexieva6-1, 1-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAlly Alston / Jessica Rivas vs Amalea Tshilds / Leslie Sauer0-6, 6-5, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMary Chang / Abbey Cullen vs Andrea Sosa / Julie Lawin4-6, 4-2, 0-1
2025-09-28vs CDTA E 40&OW3.0 2RT Cox Sun 4 $27Lost 03
L#1 DoublesVanessa Ruiz / Anna Klemm vs Daione Mitchell / Lisa Foster0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesAlly Alston / Jessica Rivas vs Janet Mital / Jaime Bennett4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesAbbey Cullen / Anita Kim vs Hattie Stamer / Cynthia Rowe1-6, 2-6
W#1 DoublesAlly Alston / Jessica Rivas vs Amanda Baker / Carolyn Driscoll6-3, 6-4
W#1 SinglesBeata Gaska-Aniolowski vs Michelle Molna6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesAnita Kim / Abbey Cullen vs Prabha Parameswaran / Kafi Chase4-6, 4-6
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 standings9 teams · CDTA E 40&O Women 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA E 40&OW3.0 2RT Cox Sun 4 $2771201224204
2CDTA E 40&OW3.0 5MTP Snyder Sat 2 $276225719212
3CDTA E 40&OW3.0 8Glvw Tromp Fri 7 $216223919191
4CDTA E 40&OW3.0 3RCLB Sherman Sat 4 $2262221021211
5CDTA E 40&OW3.0 7MTB Shappert Sun 6 $2744171532242
6CDTA E 40&OW3.0 4MTC Brown2 Sun 6 $33.53592348317
7CDTA E 40&OW3.0 6Cent Steinbrueck Sun 5 $2026112145305
8CDTA E 40&OW3.0 1MTC Brown1 Sun 6 $33.52692349312
9CDTA E 40&OW3.0 9Herit Werts Sat 4 $250882454339

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 2.64 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.

3.42
Beata Gaska-Aniolowski
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
2.82
Mariana Ingersoll
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.76
Mary Chang
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.71
Andee Harris
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.69
Vanessa Ruiz
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
2.55
Jessica Rivas
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.48
Anna Klemm
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.45
Ally Alston
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.38
Anita Kim
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 2.5
2.11
Abbey Cullen
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
Jean Klingle
published
Kara Levin
published
Marguerite Wickman
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.

Abbey Cullen + Anita Kim0529% gamesnot enough data
Ally Alston + Jessica Rivas224 matchesnot enough data
Mariana Ingersoll + Mary Chang303 matchesnot enough data
Andee Harris + Vanessa Ruiz123 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.

3.5
Beata Gaska-Aniolowski
10W–3L career · type D · 3 lines in 2026
<1%70%30%
3.42
3
Mariana Ingersoll
45W–48L career · 1 line in 2026
1%89%10%
2.82
Mary Chang
12W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.76
3
Andee Harris
29W–38L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
2.71
Vanessa Ruiz
3W–4L career · 6 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
2.69
Jessica Rivas
4W–15L career · 6 lines in 2026
35%65%<1%
2.55
3
Anna Klemm
10W–20L career · 1 line in 2026
57%43%<1%
2.48
3
Ally Alston
26W–38L career · 6 lines in 2026
63%37%<1%
2.45
2.5
Anita Kim
11W–15L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%81%19%
2.38
2.5
Abbey Cullen
11W–28L career · 6 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.11
Jean Klingle
4W–6L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Kara Levin
7W–2L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Marguerite Wickman
9W–4L career · no lines in 2026
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.