Teams

4S:Trifecta:Lodato/Amadeo

2025 SCT Tri-Level Women's 3.0-5.0 · 3.5 Women's Tri-Level 1

4 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SOUTHERN CONNECTICUT

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
2025-11-23vs TCT: W Tri: FranchiniWon 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Amadeo / Flavia Lodato vs Supreeti Saikia / ARLYNE THUNG6-0, 7-6
2025-10-22vs 4S:Unforced Terror: BuonoWon 10
W#1 DoublesFlavia Lodato / Jennifer Amadeo vs Shannon Craley / Ruth van Den Nieuwenhuizen7-6, 6-3
2025-09-28vs 4S:One For All:RoseWon 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Amadeo / Meredith Naidorf vs Elizabeth Rose / Sarah OMalley6-3, 6-1
2025-09-27vs WRC:3.5 Tri:Lieberson/EvenWon 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Amadeo / Flavia Lodato vs Trudie Gubitz / Brooke Craemer6-7, 6-2, 1-0
2025-09-24vs GCC: 3.5 Tri:RothLost 01
L#1 DoublesJennifer Amadeo / Flavia Lodato vs Allison Hickey / Suzanne Roth1-6, 1-6
2025-09-17vs 4S:Nuts:Ortiz/CazenaveWon 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Amadeo / Maureen Greenberg vs Sally Bednar / Penny Schmitt7-6, 6-3
L#1 DoublesMaureen Greenberg / Meredith Naidorf vs Trish Rosa / Jennifer Avari5-7, 6-1, 0-1
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 standings8 teams · 3.5 Women's Tri-Level 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1GCC: 3.5 Tri:Roth0770140
2MRC 3.5 Southern CT Tri Level:Bandak0752545
34S:Trifecta:Lodato/Amadeo0752558
44S:One For All:Rose0734862
5WRC:3.5 Tri:Lieberson/Even0734975
64S:Unforced Terror: Buono07251074
74S:Nuts:Ortiz/Cazenave07251172
8TCT: W Tri: Franchini07161275

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 3.51 estimated across 4 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.

3.64
Meredith Naidorf
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.60
Maureen Greenberg
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.40
Flavia Lodato
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.39
Jennifer Amadeo
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.

Jennifer Amadeo + Flavia Lodato7257% games+5.7% vs expected
Maureen Greenberg + Meredith Naidorf2446% games−0.7% vs expected
Jennifer Amadeo + Meredith Naidorf303 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.

Meredith Naidorf
78W–47L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%14%86%
3.64
Maureen Greenberg
35W–24L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%22%78%
3.60
3.5
Flavia Lodato
82W–52L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
3.40
Jennifer Amadeo
112W–132L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.39

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.