Teams

CDTA E M18&O8.0 4RT Burks Sat 2 $27

CDTA ESL Mixed 18 & Over · CDTA E Mixed 18&O 8.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.90 / CHICAGO

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 →
Schedule5 played
L#3 DoublesMichael Hong / Shana Cal vs Liza Spinazze / Kevin Franzen3-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#2 DoublesColleen Chionis / Karl Blase vs Yoshitaka Nakahara / Teodora Varcheva0-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesShana Cal / Rahul Patet vs Koki Saito / Yukiko Juretic5-7, 6-7
L#2 DoublesRahul Patet / Shana Cal vs Misha Tseytlin / Laura Burns2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesThomas Strickler / Priscilla Ewaldz vs Todd Wagner / Alia Zander2-6, 4-6
L#1 DoublesIgor Gogov / Colleen Chionis vs Jane Girard / Randy Orr5-7, 7-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJazz Burks / Haiying Yuan vs Manik Dewan / Melanie Nadell1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJazz Burks / Christine Munteanu vs Rick Spurgeon / Amanda Fishleder3-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesIgor Gogov / Colleen Chionis vs James Klein / Desiree Witte6-1, 6-3
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 CDTA E Mixed 18&O 8.0 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 3.65 estimated across 10 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.

4.07
Shana Cal
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.94
Christine Munteanu
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.88
Igor Gogov
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.79
Jazz Burks
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
Alison Miller
published 4
3.74
Colleen Chionis
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.66
Priscilla Ewaldz
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.51
Michael Hong
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.40
Karl Blase
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.33
Rahul Patet
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.21
Haiying Yuan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Giang Bui
published
Thomas Strickler
usually #3 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.

Colleen Chionis + Jazz Burks6452% games+3.3% vs expected
Colleen Chionis + Thomas Strickler5948% gamesnot enough data
Alison Miller + Thomas Strickler4647% gamesnot enough data
Alison Miller + Jazz Burks2438% gamesnot enough data
Shana Cal + Michael Hong2350% gamesnot enough data
Christine Munteanu + Jazz Burks1434% gamesnot enough data
Colleen Chionis + Igor Gogov224 matchesnot enough data
Haiying Yuan + Jazz Burks123 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
Shana Cal
140W–108L career · 3 lines in 2026
31%69%<1%
4.07
4
Christine Munteanu
89W–95L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%67%33%
3.94
4
Igor Gogov
193W–84L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%80%19%
3.88
4
Jazz Burks
229W–226L career · 9 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.79
4
Alison Miller
52W–101L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
4
Colleen Chionis
180W–187L career · 3 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.74
4
Priscilla Ewaldz
145W–184L career · 1 line in 2026
13%87%1%
3.66
Michael Hong
124W–70L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.51
3.5
Karl Blase
48W–54L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Rahul Patet
112W–111L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%87%12%
3.33
3.5
Haiying Yuan
35W–56L career · type A · 1 line in 2026
7%91%2%
3.21
Giang Bui
11W–10L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Thomas Strickler
138W–200L career · 1 line in 2026
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.