Teams

NITA W 40W18c River Trails (Miller)

2022 NITA2 Winter Adult 18 & Over · NITA Winter 18 & Over 4.0 Women

16 players · average NTRP 3.94 / 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 DoublesVictoria Dargis / Ana Chang vs Kristine Jurczyk / Erica Eisner2-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesDimitrina Schoyer / Katie Calmeyn vs Julie Steinberg / Bela Starkman3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAlison Miller / Karen Salter vs Eileen Lee / Leah Starkman3-6, 4-6
2022-03-20vs NITA W 40W18b Norris RC (Nagel)Lost 12
W#1 DoublesAna Chang / Colleen Chionis vs Soraya McTeague / Valerie Nagel4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAlison Miller / Emily Doyle vs Vicki Mitchell / Patricia Nelson1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesDimitrina Schoyer / Tanja Boskovic vs MEREDITH BETTCHER / Renee Buxton3-6, 3-6
2022-03-05vs NITA W 40W18g Naperville TC (Madura)Split 22
W#1 DoublesColleen Chionis / Tricia Dziabis vs Todra Oken / Carole Liang6-4, 6-1
L#1 SinglesEmily Doyle vs Tiffany Oken2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesAna Chang / Mary McIlwee vs Allison Genovese / Gretchen Langer4-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesSANDRA MEJIA / Karen Salter vs Teri Andersen / Jeanne Johnson7-5, 4-6, 1-0
2022-02-26Won 20
W#2 DoublesUrszula Farry / Zanobia Syed vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesDimitrina Schoyer / Patty Kulpins vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-02-14vs NITA W 40W18a TAM (Farinas)Lost 03
L#1 SinglesAna Chang vs Ruth Karakosta2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesDebbie Ackerman / Colleen Chionis vs Martha Davis / Kitty Swanson6-3, 4-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesDimitrina Schoyer / Tanja Boskovic vs Amy Goss / Rebecca Daly4-6, 3-5
2022-02-05vs NITA W 40W18h Rush Copley (Stine)Won 21
L#1 DoublesTanja Boskovic / Tricia Dziabis vs Dorothy OMalley / Alicia Yaeger6-1, 5-7, 0-1
W#1 SinglesAna Chang vs Denise Rippetoe-Reed6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesZanobia Syed / Karen Salter vs Sandy Peters / Elena Kovalenko6-1, 6-4
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 standings8 teams · NITA Winter 18 & Over 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA W 40W18a TAM (Farinas)7025310160
2NITA W 40W18b Norris RC (Nagel)61181023204
3NITA W 40W18d Heritage TC (Campanelli/Jurczyk)5224411146
4NITA W 40W18f Score (Bianchi/Knutte)43161227203
5NITA W 40W18g Naperville TC (Madura)3482041271
6NITA W 40W18c River Trails (Miller)25101838247
7NITA W 40W18e Oak Lawn RC (Gaynor)1672145297
8NITA W 40W18h Rush Copley (Stine)0742452318

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 3.72 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.

4.39
Emily Doyle
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.03
Ana Chang
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.77
Urszula Farry
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.77
Colleen Chionis
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
Alison Miller
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
Debbie Ackerman
published 4
3.65
Patty Kulpins
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.41
Tanja Boskovic
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.39
Dimitrina Schoyer
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
3.35
Tricia Dziabis
published
Karen Salter
published
Katie Calmeyn
published
Mary McIlwee
published
SANDRA MEJIA
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Victoria Dargis
published
Zanobia Syed
usually #2 Doubles 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.

Ana Chang + Emily Doyle24963% games+6.1% vs expected
Patty Kulpins + Alison Miller4854% games+3.8% vs expected
Tanja Boskovic + Dimitrina Schoyer322452% games+3.2% vs expected
Alison Miller + Colleen Chionis102248% games−5.5% vs expected
Patty Kulpins + Colleen Chionis2455% gamesnot enough data
Karen Salter + Ana Chang6060% gamesnot enough data
Tanja Boskovic + Urszula Farry4161% gamesnot enough data
Alison Miller + Ana Chang044 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.

4.5
Emily Doyle
132W–64L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%80%20%
4.39
4
Ana Chang
210W–115L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%42%58%
4.03
4
Urszula Farry
85W–43L career · 4 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Colleen Chionis
180W–187L career · 3 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Alison Miller
69W–110L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Debbie Ackerman
8W–4L career · type S · no lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Patty Kulpins
69W–104L career · 1 line in 2022
13%86%<1%
3.65
3.5
Tanja Boskovic
194W–136L career · 8 lines in 2022
<1%76%24%
3.41
3.5
Dimitrina Schoyer
286W–188L career · 7 lines in 2022
<1%81%19%
3.39
Tricia Dziabis
0W–8L career · no lines in 2022
88%12%<1%
3.35
Karen Salter
46W–58L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Katie Calmeyn
1W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Mary McIlwee
7W–15L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
SANDRA MEJIA
26W–24L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Victoria Dargis
13W–7L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Zanobia Syed
30W–58L career · 1 line 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.