Teams

NITA E 40W18d The Racket Club (Martinez)

2022 NITA1 ESL Adult 18 & Over · NITA ESL 18 & Over 4.0 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.88 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
L#1 DoublesTara Brix / Anne Zanella-Gleason vs Leslie McClure / Soraya McTeague5-7, 4-6
W#1 SinglesMacY Morales vs Renee Buxton6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesYuko Suzuki / Anitra Willis vs Lori Saguto / Cindy Sullivan4-6, 3-6
L#1 DoublesOzlen Er / Kelly Niese vs Dawn Baumann / Eileen Lee6-1, 3-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesTara Brix vs Michelle Lee0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesConni Stinek / Anne Zanella-Gleason vs Lynette Trost / Dianne Fasano4-6, 6-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAnitra Willis / Ali Gerstad vs Jennifer Kunde / Jennifer Peck7-5, 4-6, 1-0
2021-11-15vs NITA E 40W18a TAM (Farinas)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesAli Gerstad / Yuko Suzuki vs Ali Laumann / Katie Wilson2-6, 0-6
W#1 SinglesMacY Morales vs Jennifer Krysinski6-3, 6-2
L#2 DoublesSharon Martinez / Yvonne Davis vs Martha Davis / Rebecca Daly0-6, 0-6
2021-11-07Won 20
W#1 SinglesAli Gerstad vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesAnne Zanella-Gleason / Shelley Madsen vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#1 DoublesAnne Zanella-Gleason / Conni Stinek vs Angela Anglin Weathers / Cecile Partee6-3, 6-1
W#1 SinglesMacY Morales vs Kimberly Ellis6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesShelley Madsen / Anitra Willis vs Shelley Young / Sheila Bai6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesYvonne Davis / Melissa Beruscha vs Lorrie Hart / Gemma Ross7-5, 6-5
L#1 DoublesTara Brix / Ali Gerstad vs Ellen Elliot / Andrea Church6-7, 4-5
W#1 SinglesMacY Morales vs Stacey Dohman7-5, 6-1
W#2 DoublesYuko Suzuki / Anitra Willis vs Michelle Reynolds / Jennifer Lee2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSharon Martinez / Yvonne Davis vs Rebecca Geraci / Penny Knapik7-5, 3-6, 0-1
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 standings11 teams · NITA ESL 18 & Over 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA E 40W18c Heritage TC (Campanelli/Jurczyk)91291128245
2NITA E 40W18g Norris Center (Nagel)8231928282
3NITA E 40W18a TAM (Farinas)73281232248
4NITA E 40W18i River Trails (Miller)64251533305
5NITA E 40W18e Score (Bianchi/Knutte)64231738287
6NITA E 40W18b Wheaton SC (Tansey/Dohman)64221842332
7NITA E 40W18j Homewood-Flossmoor (Morrissette)55202044303
8NITA E 40W18d The Racket Club (Martinez)37132756378
9NITA E 40W18k Naperville TC (Madura)28132756370
10NITA E 40W18f Rush Copley (Stine)2883264409
11NITA E 40W18h Oak Lawn RC (Gaynor)1983267405

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 3.53 estimated across 11 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.

3.94
MacY Morales
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.89
Anne Zanella-Gleason
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.72
Yuko Suzuki
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.68
Anitra Willis
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.58
Tara Brix
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.57
Ozlen Er
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.54
Ali Gerstad
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 4
3.52
Shelley Madsen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.50
Conni Stinek
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.21
Yvonne Davis
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.73
Sharon Martinez
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
Melissa Beruscha
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Muge Parmaksiz
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.

Anne Zanella-Gleason + Anitra Willis9360% games+5.9% vs expected
Shelley Madsen + Yuko Suzuki5159% games+5.7% vs expected
Conni Stinek + Anne Zanella-Gleason311059% games+3.3% vs expected
Shelley Madsen + Anitra Willis11655% games+2.1% vs expected
Conni Stinek + Tara Brix19653% games−2.8% vs expected
Conni Stinek + Ali Gerstad31039% games−14.4% vs expected
Tara Brix + Yuko Suzuki1729% gamesnot enough data
Conni Stinek + Yuko Suzuki7066% 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
MacY Morales
103W–58L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%67%33%
3.94
4
Anne Zanella-Gleason
111W–59L career · type A · 4 lines in 2022
<1%80%19%
3.89
4
Yuko Suzuki
111W–100L career · 3 lines in 2022
5%94%2%
3.72
4
Anitra Willis
88W–74L career · 4 lines in 2022
9%91%1%
3.68
Tara Brix
33W–56L career · 3 lines in 2022
28%72%<1%
3.58
Ozlen Er
43W–75L career · 1 line in 2022
29%71%<1%
3.57
4
Ali Gerstad
123W–151L career · 4 lines in 2022
39%61%<1%
3.54
4
Shelley Madsen
46W–44L career · 2 lines in 2022
45%55%<1%
3.52
4
Conni Stinek
139W–109L career · 2 lines in 2022
49%51%<1%
3.50
Yvonne Davis
47W–114L career · 3 lines in 2022
99%1%<1%
3.21
3
Sharon Martinez
115W–167L career · 2 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.73
Melissa Beruscha
5W–11L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Muge Parmaksiz
10W–27L 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.