Teams

NITA S 35W18e Oak Park CC-Pohl/Druckman

2026 NITA3 Summer Adult 18 & Over · NITA Summer Adult 18 & Over 3.5 Women

16 players · average NTRP 3.33 / 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 →
Schedule7 played
W#1 DoublesTory Anderson / Brigette Whisnant vs Veronique Doebeli Saxe / DONNA SAGER6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesTracie Doherty / Stephanie Samalis vs Lynne Schwartz / Cathy Albrecht7-5, 6-4
W#3 DoublesSuzanne Griffin / Ellie Spoerer vs Barbara Country / Vicky Ramuta7-5, 6-4
L#1 DoublesTrish Ryan / Stephanie Samalis vs Shilpa Iyer / Heidi Brand5-7, 3-4
L#1 SinglesTory Anderson vs Yullia Babaieva0-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesCatherine Schiavone / Carolyn Durham vs DONNA SAGER / Veronique Doebeli Saxe0-6, 2-6
2026-07-11vs NITA S 35W18d TAM-Lobo-CoreyLost 02
L#2 DoublesDee Dee Carr / Brigette Whisnant vs Maria Lobo-Corey / Susan Ellison7-6, 4-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesSuzanne Griffin / Carolyn Durham vs Moon Kaneshiro / Svetlana Kanev2-6, 1-6
2026-06-20vs NITA S 35W18a Naperville-BianchiLost 04
L#1 DoublesTracie Doherty / Amy Paris vs Katie Ketchum / Kelly Markworth3-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesStephanie Samalis vs Lori Judy2-6, 5-6
L#2 DoublesTrish Ryan / Brigette Whisnant vs Sara Batzold / Janine Stalcup4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesSuzanne McFarlin / Suzanne Griffin vs SoYoung Grote / Tece Hendrickson2-6, 1-6
2026-06-08vs NITA S 35W18d TAM-Lobo-CoreyLost 03
L#1 SinglesVanessa Druckman vs Jeanne Tromp6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesHelen Lee / Meg Chalmers vs Kathy Kasiurak / Susan Ellison2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAmy Paris / Catherine Schiavone vs Sang Boon Lee / Laura Knapp0-6, 1-6
2026-06-06Lost 01
L#1 DoublesStephanie Samalis / Brigette Whisnant vs Sonja Anders / Erin Baker2-6, 3-6
2026-05-17vs NITA S 35W18b River Trails-LamLost 03
L#1 DoublesTrish Ryan / Suzanne McFarlin vs Agnieszka Fijol / Brianna Keane2-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesDee Dee Carr / Christine Cucinotta vs Denise Lam / Judy Godinho4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesDiana Neilson / Carolyn Durham vs Michelle Yuen / Tina Cid1-6, 1-6
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 standings5 teams · NITA Summer Adult 18 & Over 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA S 35W18b River Trails-Lam8027513152
2NITA S 35W18a Naperville-Bianchi53211126234
3NITA S 35W18d TAM-Lobo-Corey53221027235
4NITA S 35W18c Rush Copley-Saxe/Schwartz1772551323
5NITA S 35W18e Oak Park CC-Pohl/Druckman1732958367

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 3.04 estimated across 6 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.

3.36
Brigette Whisnant
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Christine Cucinotta
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Dee Dee Carr
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Diana Neilson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Tracie Doherty
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.17
Stephanie Samalis
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.10
Meg Chalmers
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.06
Vanessa Druckman
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.02
Suzanne Griffin
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Catherine Schiavone
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Ellie Spoerer
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.53
Carolyn Durham
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Amy Paris
published
Nicole Kirk
published
Suzanne McFarlin
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Tory Anderson
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 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.

Vanessa Druckman + Suzanne McFarlin1536% 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.

3.5
Brigette Whisnant
2W–7L career · type S · 4 lines in 2026
<1%86%14%
3.36
3.5
Christine Cucinotta
1W–9L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Dee Dee Carr
0W–2L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Diana Neilson
0W–4L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Tracie Doherty
7W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Stephanie Samalis
3W–6L career · type S · 4 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.17
Meg Chalmers
2W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.10
Vanessa Druckman
20W–42L career · 1 line in 2026
31%69%<1%
3.06
Suzanne Griffin
1W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
45%55%<1%
3.02
3
Catherine Schiavone
0W–5L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
3
Ellie Spoerer
1W–1L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
3
Carolyn Durham
1W–9L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
42%58%<1%
2.53
Amy Paris
0W–2L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Nicole Kirk
0W–1L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Suzanne McFarlin
8W–23L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Tory Anderson
8W–25L career · 2 lines 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.