Teams

HANSEN - ACING GRACEFULLY 4.5 40+ S23

2023 ADULT 40 & OVER SUMMER · 4.5 Women

14 players · average NTRP 4.50 / NORTHERN

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 →
Schedule3 played
2023-07-17vs Wahlstrand- Old Ladies 40+ S23Won 10
W#2 DoublesBernadette McCann / Ann Eliason vs Carol Schmelz / Sheila Engert6-0, 6-1
2023-06-26vs Greene- Summer Fun 40+ S23Won 10
W#3 DoublesAnn Eliason / Bernadette McCann vs Ann McNamara / Andrea Boado6-1, 6-2
2023-06-12vs Northern/McDonald/40&Over4.5WLost 01
L#3 DoublesAnn Eliason / Bernadette McCann vs Rachel LaTour / Sara Humann5-7, 0-6
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 4.5 Women 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 4.19 estimated across 11 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.

4.73
Danielle Niska
published 5
4.39
Linnea Benson
published
4.31
Bernadette McCann
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.27
Elisabeth Walker
published 4.5
Caryn Winkler
published 4.5
4.16
Beci Bjornson
published 4.5
4.15
Ann Eliason
published 4.5
4.14
Dana Hansen
published 4.5
4.06
Alison Khan
published 4.5
4.04
Dilcia Stromberg
published 4.5
4.00
Christine Conner
published 4.5
3.79
Heidi Jung
published 4
Lindsay Kallas
published
Tanya Kvam
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.

Bernadette McCann + Ann Eliason3454% games+0.1% vs expected
Elisabeth Walker + Linnea Benson303 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.

5
Danielle Niska
18W–5L career · no lines in 2023
4%94%2%
4.73
Linnea Benson
17W–6L career · no lines in 2023
<1%81%19%
4.39
4.5
Bernadette McCann
75W–33L career · 3 lines in 2023
1%92%7%
4.31
4.5
Elisabeth Walker
28W–10L career · no lines in 2023
2%94%4%
4.27
4.5
Caryn Winkler
2W–1L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
4.5
Beci Bjornson
17W–21L career · no lines in 2023
10%89%<1%
4.16
4.5
Ann Eliason
4W–9L career · no lines in 2023
12%88%<1%
4.15
4.5
Dana Hansen
7W–10L career · no lines in 2023
14%86%<1%
4.14
4.5
Alison Khan
6W–13L career · no lines in 2023
32%68%<1%
4.06
4.5
Dilcia Stromberg
8W–28L career · no lines in 2023
37%63%<1%
4.04
4.5
Christine Conner
3W–4L career · no lines in 2023
49%51%<1%
4.00
4
Heidi Jung
14W–11L career · no lines in 2023
1%93%6%
3.79
Lindsay Kallas
3W–1L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Tanya Kvam
0W–2L career · no lines in 2023
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.