Teams

Acing Gracefully

2025 Montgomery Adult 40 & Over · Montgomery Adult 40 & Over 3.0 Women

17 players · average NTRP 2.94 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-03-17vs Racquet HandelsLost 01
L#1 SinglesDeanna Jezek vs Emily Schabacker6-7, 0-2
2025-03-15vs Racquet HandelsSplit 22
W#1 DoublesHayley Flack / Chung Kim vs Mariechen Bresler / Nancy Davis6-1, 6-1
W#1 SinglesOona Schmid vs Justine Handelman6-4, 6-1
L#2 DoublesSusan Ronan / Cecilia Khoo vs Helen Mahoney / Sarah Thomas5-7, 7-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesBelinda Chu / Barbara Clements vs Shelley Moeller / Lourdes Sanchez4-6, 7-6, 0-1
2025-03-08vs 3.0verachieversWon 10
W#2 DoublesDeanna Jezek / Robin Bertot vs Janice Zima / Gail Ribas3-6, 6-1, 1-0
2025-03-04vs Racquet HandelsLost 01
L#1 SinglesDeanna Jezek vs Emily Schabacker2-6, 5-3
2025-02-26Lost 01
L#3 DoublesDeanna Jezek / Lauren Rubin vs Alison Smith / Tracie Hill4-6, 5-7
2025-02-12vs Racquet HandelsLost 13
L#1 DoublesRobin Bertot / Stacy Ferguson vs Jennifer Lin-Liu / Laura Feiveson2-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesAnn Hudock vs Justine Handelman0-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMelissa Gracyalny / Christine Zmuda vs Helen Mahoney / Sarah Thomas6-0, 6-0
L#3 DoublesBelinda Chu / Lauren Rubin vs Wendy Wicker / Kim Cooper5-7, 3-6
2025-02-02vs Honey Deuce 3.0Lost 01
L#3 DoublesDeanna Jezek / Susan Ronan vs Mugdha Samant / Alison Smith4-6, 4-6
2025-01-28vs 3.0verachieversLost 01
L#2 DoublesDeanna Jezek / Ann Hudock vs Carol Darling / Maria Angelica Camp1-6, 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 standings for Montgomery Adult 40 & Over 3.0 Women 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 2.64 estimated across 14 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.

2.92
Hayley Flack
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.90
Deanna Jezek
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.90
Leah Getlan
published
2.79
Ann Hudock
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
2.71
Susan Ronan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.70
Lauren Rubin
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.69
Chung Kim
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.62
Belinda Chu
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.56
Stacy Ferguson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.54
Robin Bertot
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.50
Cecilia Khoo
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.48
Christine Zmuda
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.45
Barbara Clements
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.18
Emma Impavido
published 2.5
Melissa Gracyalny
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Oona Schmid
usually #1 Singles 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.

Hayley Flack + Stacy Ferguson4446% games−3.4% vs expected
Barbara Clements + Cecilia Khoo044 matchesnot enough data
Mara Nelson-Grynaviski + Hayley Flack213 matchesnot enough data
Christine Zmuda + Melissa Gracyalny213 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
Hayley Flack
10W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%73%27%
2.92
3
Deanna Jezek
39W–38L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
2.90
Leah Getlan
1W–6L career · no lines in 2025
<1%78%21%
2.90
Mara Nelson-Grynaviski
12W–7L career · no lines in 2025
1%94%5%
2.79
3
Ann Hudock
0W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Susan Ronan
7W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
5%93%1%
2.71
Lauren Rubin
0W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
6%93%1%
2.70
3
Chung Kim
10W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
7%92%1%
2.69
3
Belinda Chu
1W–4L career · 2 lines in 2025
18%81%<1%
2.62
Stacy Ferguson
6W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
32%67%<1%
2.56
Robin Bertot
1W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
37%63%<1%
2.54
3
Cecilia Khoo
2W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
50%50%<1%
2.50
3
Christine Zmuda
2W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
57%43%<1%
2.48
3
Barbara Clements
0W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
65%35%<1%
2.45
2.5
Emma Impavido
0W–3L career · no lines in 2025
0%99%1%
2.18
Melissa Gracyalny
2W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Oona Schmid
3W–0L career · 1 line in 2025
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.