Teams

NITA W 45W40c The Racket Club (Martinez)

2022 NITA2 Winter Adult 40 & Over · NITA Winter 40 & Over 4.5 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.88 / 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
2022-05-01vs NITA W 45W40b Rush Copley (Adams)Lost 12
W#1 DoublesLori Saguto / Linda Swalla vs Leslie McClure / Soraya McTeague7-6, 2-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMacY Morales / Anitra Willis vs Lisa Vlach / Susan DiMagno0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesOzlen Er / Ceyda Arslan vs Ginger Riessen / Linda Wright1-6, 1-6
2022-04-24vs NITA W 45W40b Rush Copley (Adams)Won 21
W#1 DoublesColleen Chionis / Lori Saguto vs Lisa Vlach / Lisa Waugh6-3, 6-3
W#1 SinglesMacY Morales vs Catherine Grover6-0, 6-3
L#2 DoublesCeyda Arslan / Anitra Willis vs Susan Thornquist / Leslie Buch4-6, 6-5, 0-1
L#1 DoublesColleen Chionis / Linda Swalla vs Elizabeth Biscan / Jean Maren1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCeyda Arslan / Ozlen Er vs Jenny Riddle / Sue DeMari2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesMacY Morales / Yuko Suzuki vs Jessica Grizzell / Cathy Bloedorn2-6, 1-6
2022-02-27vs NITA W 45W40b Rush Copley (Adams)Lost 04
L#1 DoublesOzlen Er / Kelly Niese vs Alpna Yousfi / Stacey Dohman3-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesMacY Morales vs Catherine Grover5-7, 0-4
L#2 DoublesLori Saguto / Anitra Willis vs Ann Ko / Susan DiMagno4-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesYuko Suzuki / Tara Brix vs BethAnn Fitzgerald / Linda Wright3-6, 0-6
L#1 DoublesOzlen Er / Lori Saguto vs Shana Cal / Johanna Croll2-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesMacY Morales vs Jennifer Langtry7-5, 2-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesConni Stinek / Tara Brix vs Laura Seaman / Heike Spahn2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesYuko Suzuki / Anitra Willis vs Heather Stenmark / Kerry Nowicki2-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesLori Saguto / Colleen Chionis vs Betty Rae Smith / Cathy Bloedorn3-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#1 SinglesMacY Morales vs Elizabeth Biscan3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesOzlen Er / Ceyda Arslan vs Penny Heuer / Jessica Grizzell4-6, 6-7
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 · NITA Winter 40 & Over 4.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA 45W40 Naperville TC (Richards/Demari)8128820221
2NITA W 45W40a Glenbrook RC (Stenmark/Seaman)72261022212
3NITA W 45W40b Rush Copley (Adams)27122451343
4NITA W 45W40c The Racket Club (Martinez)1863063402

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 3.57 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.

3.94
MacY Morales
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.77
Colleen Chionis
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Yuko Suzuki
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.68
Lori Saguto
usually #1 Doubles 62%, also #2 Doubles 39% · published 4
3.68
Anitra Willis
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.58
Tara Brix
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.57
Ozlen Er
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.56
Ceyda Arslan
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published 4
3.50
Conni Stinek
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
2.73
Sharon Martinez
published 3
Linda Swalla
usually #1 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 + Anitra Willis2450% games+3.8% vs expected
Colleen Chionis + Tara Brix0543% games+1.3% vs expected
Conni Stinek + Tara Brix19653% games−2.8% vs expected
Ozlen Er + Ceyda Arslan31842% games−3.4% vs expected
Tara Brix + Yuko Suzuki1729% gamesnot enough data
Conni Stinek + Yuko Suzuki7066% gamesnot enough data
Yuko Suzuki + MacY Morales1637% gamesnot enough data
Ozlen Er + Yuko Suzuki5069% 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.

4
MacY Morales
103W–58L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%67%33%
3.94
4
Colleen Chionis
180W–187L career · 3 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Yuko Suzuki
111W–100L career · 3 lines in 2022
5%94%2%
3.72
4
Lori Saguto
223W–119L career · 13 lines in 2022
9%91%1%
3.68
4
Anitra Willis
88W–74L career · 4 lines in 2022
9%91%1%
3.68
Tara Brix
33W–56L career · 2 lines in 2022
28%72%<1%
3.58
Ozlen Er
43W–75L career · 5 lines in 2022
29%71%<1%
3.57
4
Ceyda Arslan
64W–71L career · 7 lines in 2022
33%67%<1%
3.56
4
Conni Stinek
139W–109L career · 1 line in 2022
49%51%<1%
3.50
3
Sharon Martinez
115W–167L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.73
Linda Swalla
9W–15L career · 2 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.