Teams

Glam Slams

2022 40&Over Women Spring · Summer

21 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NEW JERSEY 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 →
Schedule9 played
2022-06-10vs Bad AcesLost 04
L#1 DoublesCheryl Holmes / Julie Raymond vs Betsy Saka / Mary Beaver5-7, 3-6
L#1 SinglesTina Wong vs Simona Satruc4-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesLorena Zacchino / Erica Kaplan vs Robin Hirsch / Debra Cwiek2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesSherri Lane / Janet Applebaum vs Elyse Kleinman / Jill Schulz0-6, 1-6
2022-06-03vs NJ: Ninja ServesLost 04
L#1 DoublesJulie Raymond / Catheryn Cohen vs Patty Humes / Laureena McCormack3-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#1 SinglesAllyson Tanenbaum vs Mandy Carri1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCindy Underwood / Lynne Ferrandino vs Dana Donohue / Nina Lo4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesSherri Lane / Dawn Staniforth vs Nicole Esposito Maroney / Ellen Forlenza0-6, 0-6
2022-05-20vs NJ: Ninja ServesLost 04
L#1 DoublesSusan Gunther / Tina Wong vs Lanae Herman / Patty Humes4-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesRandi Marder vs Anna Vella0-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesPhyllis Mandelbaum / Sandra Esquenazi vs Sarah Chin / Dana Donohue4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesSherri Lane / Janet Russotto vs Jaime Shapiro / Mandy Carri0-6, 0-6
2022-05-13vs Bad AcesLost 12
L#1 DoublesCheryl Holmes / Catheryn Cohen vs Jill Schulz / Anna Nijnens0-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesLynne Ferrandino / Jacqueline Karlin vs Gerilyn Mahlof / Clare Gray1-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesRandi Marder / Janet Applebaum vs Robin Hirsch / STEPHANIE CATALINA4-6, 6-1, 1-0
2022-05-06vs This Is...40 LOVELost 13
L#1 DoublesDiane Koehler / Susan Gunther vs Michele Beal / Madeline Devito3-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#1 SinglesTina Wong vs Agnieszka Lemanski1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCheryl Holmes / Catheryn Cohen vs Margaret Jones / Lucia Marchetta3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesErica Kaplan / Lorena Zacchino vs June Rizzo / Zuleida Wolfson6-2, 6-2
2022-04-29vs NJ: Ninja ServesLost 03
L#1 DoublesJulie Raymond / Tina Wong vs Nina Lo / Jaime Shapiro1-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesDawn Staniforth / Lorena Zacchino vs Laureena McCormack / Dima Mousselli0-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesCheryl Holmes / Laurie Goldzweig vs Ellen Forlenza / Lanae Herman2-6, 5-7
2022-04-22vs This Is...40 LOVELost 13
L#1 DoublesLulu Ablan / Susan Gunther vs Victoria Reznik / Marisol Young5-7, 1-6
L#1 SinglesAllyson Tanenbaum vs Agnieszka Lemanski1-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesLynne Ferrandino / Cindy Underwood vs June Rizzo / Susan Sause3-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJanet Russotto / Janet Applebaum vs Kim Paris / Patricia Martinelli3-6, 2-6
2022-04-08vs Bad AcesLost 04
L#1 DoublesDiane Koehler / Julie Raymond vs Debra Cwiek / Mary Beaver2-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesAllyson Tanenbaum vs Anna Nijnens1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesSandra Esquenazi / Phyllis Mandelbaum vs Jill Schulz / Elyse Kleinman1-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJacqueline Karlin / Laurie Goldzweig vs Linda Maffeo-Melloy / Gerilyn Mahlof1-6, 2-6
2022-04-01vs This Is...40 LOVELost 13
L#1 DoublesDiane Koehler / Julie Raymond vs Karen Stark / Annie Pollina1-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#1 SinglesAllyson Tanenbaum vs Agnieszka Lemanski2-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesSusan Gunther / Tina Wong vs Marisol Young / Michele Beal6-3, 7-5
L#3 DoublesCindy Underwood / Erica Kaplan vs Margaret Jones / Suzanne Paolello4-6, 3-6
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 standings4 teams · Summer
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NJ: Ninja Serves0931515233
2Bad Aces09231328282
3This Is...40 LOVE09142247340
4Glam Slams0943266412

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 8 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.

3.31
Tina Wong
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 40% · published
2.98
Laurie Goldzweig
published 3
2.95
Diane Koehler
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.90
Julie Raymond
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.78
Lulu Ablan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Dawn Staniforth
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
Erica Kaplan
published 3
2.72
Randi Marder
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
2.39
Janet Applebaum
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Allyson Tanenbaum
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 2.5
2.12
Sherri Lane
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Catheryn Cohen
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Cheryl Holmes
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Cindy Underwood
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Jacqueline Karlin
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Janet Russotto
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Lorena Zacchino
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Lynne Ferrandino
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Phyllis Mandelbaum
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Sandra Esquenazi
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Gunther
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · 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.

Laurie Goldzweig + Randi Marder3249% games+0.2% vs expected
Allyson Tanenbaum + Randi Marder5550% games−8.9% vs expected
Phyllis Mandelbaum + Sandra Esquenazi4546% gamesnot enough data
Laurie Goldzweig + Jacqueline Karlin123 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.

Tina Wong
94W–37L career · 5 lines in 2022
1%92%7%
3.31
3
Laurie Goldzweig
91W–79L career · no lines in 2022
<1%57%43%
2.98
3.5
Diane Koehler
9W–11L career · type S · 3 lines in 2022
66%34%<1%
2.95
Julie Raymond
22W–12L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%77%23%
2.90
Lulu Ablan
80W–63L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%94%5%
2.78
3
Dawn Staniforth
0W–2L career · type S · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Erica Kaplan
0W–5L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Randi Marder
48W–51L career · 2 lines in 2022
5%94%2%
2.72
Janet Applebaum
13W–34L career · 3 lines in 2022
81%19%<1%
2.39
2.5
Allyson Tanenbaum
20W–19L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sherri Lane
10W–22L career · 3 lines in 2022
0%>99%<1%
2.12
Catheryn Cohen
0W–3L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Cheryl Holmes
0W–4L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Cindy Underwood
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Jacqueline Karlin
5W–3L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Janet Russotto
3W–3L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Lorena Zacchino
6W–17L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Lynne Ferrandino
46W–59L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Phyllis Mandelbaum
5W–5L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sandra Esquenazi
4W–5L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Gunther
1W–3L 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.