Teams

CDTA S A18W3.5 2Centennial Lund Thu 7 $20

CDTA 1Summer Adult 18 & Over wknd · nght

23 players · average NTRP 3.53 / 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 →
Schedule7 played
W#1 DoublesDimitrina Schoyer / Margaret Weiss vs Meghan Ahlgrim / Tracy Stronsky6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesSharon Kerr-Zygmunt / Mara Berkun vs Elise Bergman / Katie Marchewka6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesErin Ross / Lauren Toedt vs Teresa Cavaligos / Jennifer Calliss6-4, 6-4
W#1 DoublesMargaret Weiss / Christine Kupfer vs Amy Byrne / Katie Walsh6-2, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesSharon Kerr-Zygmunt / Mara Berkun vs Meg LaMonica / Stephanie Nieszel6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesVicki Groo / Sarah W Johnson vs Lanna Melik / Anne Lewis3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#1 DoublesMandy Shaw / Christine Kupfer vs Chris Nelson / Camille Prindle6-4, 6-5
W#1 SinglesMargaret Weiss vs Yan Gao6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesMichelle Nacheman / Marie Dillon vs Elena Chang / Nancy Nora4-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#1 DoublesAmy Bremer / Denise Lam vs Lauren Carr / Jaye Schreier6-2, 6-4
L#1 SinglesErin Ross vs Beth Sullivan3-6, 0-6
L#2 SinglesMara Berkun vs Beth Lubotsky3-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesMandy Shaw / Christine Kupfer vs Molly Freund / Catherine Battin3-6, 5-7
L#1 SinglesSavanna Rhodes vs Sarah O'Connor3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesSharon Kerr-Zygmunt / Marie Dillon vs Nicole Toft / Elizabeth David2-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#3 DoublesErin Ross / Vicki Groo vs Diane Ramoska / Samantha Onder4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSavanna Rhodes / Erin Ross vs Carisa Conley / Denise Schneider4-6, 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 nght 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 3.30 estimated across 21 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.

3.63
Emily Lund
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.62
Amy Bremer
published 4
3.61
Denise Lam
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.59
Margaret Weiss
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.43
Alja Hessami-Maas
published 3.5
3.42
Mandy Shaw
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.39
Dimitrina Schoyer
published 3.5
3.38
Christine Kupfer
published 3.5
3.35
Mara Berkun
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
3.32
Naomi Fujimoto
published 3.5
3.29
3.24
Marie Dillon
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.22
Erin Ross
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.20
Svetlana Kanev
published 3.5
3.20
Vicki Groo
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.20
Miyuki Landt
published 3.5
3.15
Sharon Kerr-Zygmunt
published 3.5
3.11
Lauren Toedt
published 3.5
3.06
Elizabeth Cassier
published 3.5
3.03
Sarah W Johnson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.88
Patty Lynch
published
Savanna Rhodes
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Sharon Kerr-Zygmunt + Mara Berkun7161% games+13.9% vs expected
Marie Dillon + Alja Hessami-Maas6165% games+13.4% vs expected
Alja Hessami-Maas + Emily Lund23662% games+8.0% vs expected
Dimitrina Schoyer + Denise Lam21461% games+7.9% vs expected
Marie Dillon + Paula Grabow Duignan13554% games+6.9% vs expected
Naomi Fujimoto + Emily Lund5159% games+1.1% vs expected
Christine Kupfer + Mandy Shaw644053% games+1.0% vs expected
Marie Dillon + Sharon Kerr-Zygmunt5556% games+0.6% vs expected
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
Emily Lund
256W–130L career · 1 line in 2025
17%83%<1%
3.63
4
Amy Bremer
40W–21L career · no lines in 2025
18%82%<1%
3.62
3.5
Denise Lam
320W–95L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%20%80%
3.61
Margaret Weiss
83W–41L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%24%76%
3.59
3.5
Alja Hessami-Maas
214W–213L career · no lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
3.43
Mandy Shaw
99W–76L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%72%28%
3.42
3.5
Dimitrina Schoyer
286W–188L career · no lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.39
3.5
Christine Kupfer
111W–70L career · no lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.38
Mara Berkun
34W–24L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%87%13%
3.35
3.5
Naomi Fujimoto
65W–56L career · no lines in 2025
1%91%8%
3.32
3.5
Paula Grabow Duignan
118W–82L career · no lines in 2025
1%94%5%
3.29
Marie Dillon
49W–47L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%95%2%
3.24
3.5
Erin Ross
28W–38L career · 4 lines in 2025
5%94%2%
3.22
3.5
Svetlana Kanev
123W–139L career · no lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.20
Vicki Groo
24W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.20
3.5
Miyuki Landt
31W–61L career · no lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.20
3.5
Sharon Kerr-Zygmunt
156W–115L career · no lines in 2025
12%87%<1%
3.15
3.5
Lauren Toedt
17W–19L career · no lines in 2025
19%81%<1%
3.11
3.5
Elizabeth Cassier
71W–139L career · no lines in 2025
32%68%<1%
3.06
Sarah W Johnson
91W–135L career · 1 line in 2025
40%60%<1%
3.03
3
Michelle Nacheman
77W–96L career · no lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
2.88
Patty Lynch
28W–31L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Savanna Rhodes
21W–39L career · 2 lines 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.