Teams

Cross Court: Babes with Balls

2022 Winter Day League · 3.0

10 players · average NTRP 3.00 / SOUTHERN REGION

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-04-05vs PTC: ServivorsWon 30
W#1 DoublesLaurie Kowalski / Kathy McCabe vs Christy Sorrelle / Lori Bittker6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesCaroline Conston / Carolynn Frankel vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesNita Ballantyne / Virginia Goldsmith vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-03-23vs PTC: ServivorsWon 21
W#1 DoublesKelly Maloney / Kathy McCabe vs Francine Wizner / Ellen Staino6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesDonna Augustine / Jennifer McKee vs Jennifer Loprieno / Christy Sorrelle3-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesVirginia Goldsmith / Sarah Richardson vs Liz Porter / Lorraine Cucci6-1, 6-0
2022-03-01vs PTC: ServivorsWon 30
W#1 DoublesVirginia Goldsmith / Kelly Maloney vs Leah Aizen / Lori Bittker6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesCaroline Conston / Sarah Richardson vs Jennifer Loprieno / Christy Sorrelle6-4, 6-4
W#3 DoublesTiffany Flynn / Carolynn Frankel vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-02-09vs PTC: ServivorsWon 30
W#1 DoublesLaurie Kowalski / Nita Ballantyne vs Leah Aizen / Lori Bittker6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesDonna Augustine / Carolynn Frankel vs Jennifer Loprieno / Ellen Staino6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesVirginia Goldsmith / Kelly Maloney vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-01-25vs PTC: ServivorsWon 21
W#1 DoublesCaroline Conston / Carolynn Frankel vs Lori Bittker / Ellen Staino6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesLaurie Kowalski / Sarah Richardson vs Leah Aizen / Nina Gimmel7-6, 6-1
L#3 DoublesTiffany Flynn / Jennifer McKee vs Christy Sorrelle / Jennifer Loprieno1-6, 6-2, 1-0
2022-01-12vs PTC: ServivorsWon 21
L#1 DoublesVirginia Goldsmith / Kathy McCabe vs Sophia Wilcox / Elizabeth Pagano6-2, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesNita Ballantyne / Kelly Maloney vs Jennifer Loprieno / Liz Porter6-0, 6-3
W#3 DoublesDonna Augustine / Jennifer McKee vs Lorraine Cucci / Leah Aizen6-0, 6-1
2021-12-14vs PTC: ServivorsWon 30
W#1 DoublesNita Ballantyne / Laurie Kowalski vs Jennifer Loprieno / Liz Porter6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesJennifer McKee / Tiffany Flynn vs Nina Gimmel / Francine Wizner6-2, 7-5
W#3 DoublesCaroline Conston / Sarah Richardson vs Christy Sorrelle / Linda Lurie6-4, 6-2
2021-12-01vs PTC: ServivorsWon 30
W#1 DoublesCarolynn Frankel / Caroline Conston vs Leah Aizen / Liz Porter6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesLaurie Kowalski / Donna Augustine vs Lorraine Cucci / Linda Lurie6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesVirginia Goldsmith / Kelly Maloney vs Jennifer Loprieno / Lori Bittker6-0, 6-2
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 standings2 teams · 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Cross Court: Babes with Balls07183696
2PTC: Servivors0731838243

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 2.77 estimated across 7 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.

2.95
Nita Ballantyne
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.86
Carolynn Frankel
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.86
Jennifer McKee
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.77
Kelly Maloney
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.75
Laurie Kowalski
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
2.63
Caroline Conston
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.56
Donna Augustine
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
Kathy McCabe
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Tiffany Flynn
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Virginia Goldsmith
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Jennifer McKee + Carolynn Frankel8462% games+10.3% vs expected
Nita Ballantyne + Kelly Maloney10361% games+4.6% vs expected
Kelly Maloney + Virginia Goldsmith7359% games−3.3% vs expected
Carolynn Frankel + Donna Augustine6451% games−3.8% vs expected
Laurie Kowalski + Donna Augustine71444% games−5.8% vs expected
Caroline Conston + Donna Augustine111347% games−6.1% vs expected
Carolynn Frankel + Caroline Conston5749% games−15.1% vs expected
Kelly Maloney + Carolynn Frankel3345% 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.

Nita Ballantyne
125W–62L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%66%34%
2.95
3
Carolynn Frankel
92W–104L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%85%14%
2.86
Jennifer McKee
50W–65L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%86%14%
2.86
3
Kelly Maloney
150W–89L career · 5 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.77
Laurie Kowalski
57W–56L career · 5 lines in 2022
2%95%3%
2.75
3
Caroline Conston
50W–52L career · 5 lines in 2022
16%84%<1%
2.63
3
Donna Augustine
67W–81L career · 4 lines in 2022
34%66%<1%
2.56
Kathy McCabe
9W–12L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Tiffany Flynn
4W–31L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Virginia Goldsmith
28W–21L career · 4 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.