Teams

New Albany

2026 FALL A18&O WEEKEND · FALL 18&O 3.5 WOMEN Career

19 players · average NTRP 3.21 / OHIO VALLEY

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 →

Flight standings for FALL 18&O 3.5 WOMEN Career 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 3.06 estimated across 16 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.

3.38
Yvette DeLisio
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Singles 20% · published
3.28
Aoi Hirohata
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #2 Singles 43% · published 3.5
3.28
Michele Oldenquist
published
3.21
Diane Crawford
published 3.5
3.19
Cheri Lehmann
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.12
Kay Knoll
published
3.12
Gena Merkel
published
3.07
Gina Greco
published
3.07
Lisa Quinlan
published
3.06
Bridget Shoemaker
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
3.02
Jaimee Hoy
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.92
Jill Booth
published
2.89
Jen Brady
published
2.82
Vildan Meleca
published
2.80
Angela Scali
published 3
Chelle Moroz
published 3
Cherie Nelson
published 3
2.69
Mary Kusovski
published
Jodi Thomas
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.

Jodi Thomas + Gina Greco10359% games+5.8% vs expected
Kay Knoll + Michele Oldenquist12857% games+5.4% vs expected
Yvette DeLisio + Bridget Shoemaker4264% games+5.0% vs expected
Lisa Quinlan + Kay Knoll7549% games+3.3% vs expected
Bridget Shoemaker + Jaimee Hoy8359% games+1.2% vs expected
Gena Merkel + Yvette DeLisio5449% games+0.1% vs expected
Diane Crawford + Cheri Lehmann7455% games−1.3% vs expected
Diane Crawford + Yvette DeLisio5351% games−1.4% 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.

Yvette DeLisio
170W–133L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
3.38
3.5
Aoi Hirohata
11W–20L career · 7 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.28
Michele Oldenquist
62W–39L career · no lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.28
3.5
Diane Crawford
165W–132L career · no lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.21
3.5
Cheri Lehmann
73W–82L career · 5 lines in 2026
8%90%1%
3.19
Kay Knoll
81W–113L career · no lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
3.12
Gena Merkel
56W–58L career · no lines in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.12
Gina Greco
33W–30L career · no lines in 2026
31%69%<1%
3.07
Lisa Quinlan
96W–92L career · no lines in 2026
32%68%<1%
3.07
3
Bridget Shoemaker
68W–35L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
3.06
Jaimee Hoy
56W–23L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%43%57%
3.02
Jill Booth
42W–108L career · no lines in 2026
71%29%<1%
2.92
Jen Brady
24W–60L career · no lines in 2026
78%22%<1%
2.89
Vildan Meleca
22W–75L career · no lines in 2026
90%10%<1%
2.82
3
Angela Scali
34W–42L career · no lines in 2026
1%90%8%
2.80
3
Chelle Moroz
4W–14L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
3
Cherie Nelson
17W–18L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Mary Kusovski
22W–81L career · no lines in 2026
99%1%<1%
2.69
Jodi Thomas
30W–20L career · no 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.