WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML Mequon Elite Dyer
2026 WI Adult 40 & Over · WI Adult 40 & Over 4.0 Women (Eve)
15 players · average NTRP 3.67 / WISCONSIN
Schedule9 played
i
Flight standings11 teams · WI Adult 40 & Over 4.0 Women (Eve)
| Team | W | L | Sets lost | Games lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML Lake Country WAC Marshall | 9 | 0 | 12 | 229 |
| 2WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML River Glen Elite Ellegard | 7 | 2 | 26 | 268 |
| 3WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML Princeton Club Witt | 6 | 2 | 39 | 356 |
| 4WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML FLAC Trost | 6 | 2 | 40 | 345 |
| 5WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML Brookkfield East HS Wille | 6 | 3 | 47 | 388 |
| 6WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML Lake Country WAC Kossoris | 5 | 3 | 30 | 299 |
| 7WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML PVTC Neinas | 4 | 5 | 50 | 378 |
| 8WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML Lake Country WAC Abhold | 2 | 6 | 61 | 425 |
| 9WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML Brookfield East HS Moskow | 1 | 7 | 67 | 442 |
| 10WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML Mequon Elite Boulier | 1 | 8 | 82 | 536 |
| 11WI Adult 40&O 4.0W GML Mequon Elite Dyer | 0 | 9 | 80 | 492 |
Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.
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 3.38 estimated across 14 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.
Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.
| Susan Fondrie + Deanna Weiss | 8–16 | 43% games | −5.1% vs expected |
| Catherine Curro + Heidi Dyer | 17–56 | 39% games | −6.6% vs expected |
| Catherine Curro + Sue Gryniewicz | 6–2 | 55% games | not enough data |
| Susan Fondrie + Rachel Symes Orosz | 2–4 | 44% games | not enough data |
| Marjorie Kozlowski + Rachel Symes Orosz | 3–2 | 35% games | not enough data |
| Susan Fondrie + Peggy Yang | 1–3 | 4 matches | not enough data |
| Candace Walz + Deanna Weiss | 1–3 | 4 matches | not enough data |
| Eileen Paykel + Heidi Dyer | 1–3 | 4 matches | not enough data |
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.
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.