Teams

MSIL A55&O 6.0W Burr/Magers-Bloomington

2025 Adult 55 & Over - West League · West MSIL A55 & Over 6.0W

15 players · average NTRP 3.19 / MID-SOUTH ILLINOIS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-08-20vs IL/Gregory/55&Over6.0WLost 12
L#1 DoublesDana Miyat / Catherine Malin vs Maribeth Dura / Cheryl Ellis6-7, 1-6
L#2 DoublesKaren Magers / Patty Tobiasz vs Elaine Hardy / Ginny Kerwin3-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesTracy Burr / Linda Louise Carps vs Sue Chelikas / Janet Hogan6-1, 3-6, 1-0
2025-08-13vs IL/Gregory/55&Over6.0WLost 12
L#1 DoublesPat Prosser / Linda Hill vs Elaine Hardy / Ginny Kerwin4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesChris Anderson / Tracy Burr vs Jennifer Hawkins / Sue Chelikas3-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesDixie Raines / Peggy Caslow vs Letitia Spirek-Algrain / Inge Zimmerman7-5, 6-2
2025-08-06vs IL/Gregory/55&Over6.0WLost 03
L#1 DoublesLinda Hill / Pat Prosser vs Letitia Spirek-Algrain / Laura Sedory2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesLinda Louise Carps / Naveen Miller vs Jennifer Hawkins / Ginny Kerwin1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesDana Miyat / Chris Anderson vs Maribeth Dura / Inge Zimmerman5-7, 7-6, 1-0
2025-07-23Lost 02
L#1 DoublesNaveen Miller / Tracey Vincent vs Marcia Gregory / Elaine Hardy3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesDixie Raines / Nancy Snook vs Nancy Lamb / Cheryl Ellis2-6, 4-6
2025-07-09vs IL/Gregory/55&Over6.0WLost 12
L#1 DoublesKaren Magers / Anne Meysenburg vs Jennifer Hawkins / Shelley Siuts0-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesTracey Vincent / Patty Tobiasz vs Nancy Lamb / Cheryl Ellis3-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesNancy Snook / Dixie Raines vs Amy Armstrong / Janet Hogan6-1, 4-6, 1-0
2025-06-23vs IL/Gregory/55&Over6.0WSplit 11
L#1 DoublesKaren Magers / Anne Meysenburg vs Shelley Siuts / Amy Armstrong5-7, 2-6
W#3 DoublesTracy Burr / Tracey Vincent vs Marcia Gregory / Sue Chelikas6-2, 7-6
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 standings2 teams · West MSIL A55 & Over 6.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1IL/Gregory/55&Over6.0W6013512148
2MSIL A55&O 6.0W Burr/Magers-Bloomington0651328192

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 2.73 estimated across 6 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.

Anne Meysenburg
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
2.95
Peggy Caslow
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
2.91
Nancy Snook
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.82
Patty Tobiasz
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 3
Dana Miyat
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.64
Karen Magers
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.60
Darla Bruder-Goodlick
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.44
Catherine Malin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
Dixie Raines
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Linda Hill
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Linda Louise Carps
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Naveen Miller
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Pat Prosser
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Tracey Vincent
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Tracy Burr
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Peggy Caslow + Nancy Snook4647% games−7.2% vs expected
Dana Miyat + Karen Magers5256% gamesnot enough data
Karen Magers + Darla Bruder-Goodlick1642% gamesnot enough data
Catherine Malin + Patty Tobiasz3248% gamesnot enough data
Karen Magers + Tracy Burr1433% gamesnot enough data
Pat Prosser + Linda Hill1447% gamesnot enough data
Catherine Malin + Tracy Burr314 matchesnot enough data
Karen Magers + Patty Tobiasz044 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.

3.5
Anne Meysenburg
22W–25L career · 7 lines in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Peggy Caslow
72W–74L career · 5 lines in 2025
64%36%<1%
2.95
3.5
Nancy Snook
23W–40L career · 2 lines in 2025
74%26%<1%
2.91
3
Patty Tobiasz
7W–19L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
2.82
3
Dana Miyat
7W–19L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
3
Karen Magers
23W–43L career · 3 lines in 2025
15%84%1%
2.64
3
Darla Bruder-Goodlick
22W–40L career · 4 lines in 2025
24%76%<1%
2.60
3
Catherine Malin
20W–41L career · 1 line in 2025
67%33%<1%
2.44
Dixie Raines
3W–10L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Linda Hill
4W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Linda Louise Carps
2W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Naveen Miller
0W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Pat Prosser
8W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tracey Vincent
1W–15L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tracy Burr
13W–13L career · 3 lines in 2025
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.