Teams

CDTA W 40&OW4.5 3.Glenbrook Burns Sat 3 $25

CDTA Winter 40 & Over W · E

22 players · average NTRP 4.43 / CHICAGO

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 →
Schedule8 played
L#1 DoublesSophia Naiditch / Elaine Ni vs Cathy Bloedorn / Susan DiMagno2-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 DoublesLaura Seaman / Laurie Seward vs Karen Blaauw / Diedre Dunn2-6, 4-6
W#1 SinglesLaura Levin vs Pamela Blumenthal6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesKerry Nowicki / Laurie Seward vs Yupin Lerner / Bela Starkman6-0, 6-0
W#1 SinglesLaura Levin vs Haina Shin6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesMichele Ihlanfeldt / Laurie Seward vs Christine Campanelli / Dawn Baumann6-4, 1-6, 1-0
W#1 DoublesPenny Heuer / Laura Levin vs Suzanne Beu / Debbie Reyna6-4, 6-4
W#3 DoublesColette Gramins / Jennifer Micon vs Jane Girard / Beth Gilmore6-4, 6-2
W#1 DoublesMichele Ihlanfeldt / Janet Rauschenberger vs Soraya McTeague / Colleen Stover6-3, 6-4
L#1 SinglesLaura Levin vs Ruth Karakosta6-4, 0-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesHeike Spahn / Laurie Seward vs Emily Doyle / Grace Kuhrt6-2, 5-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesAmanda Ellsworth / Jill Siegel vs Alison Donnelly / Katherine Martin6-4, 4-6, 0-1
2025-02-01Won 10
W#1 SinglesLaura Levin vs Kim Richards6-1, 6-0
W#1 SinglesLaura Levin vs Perry Mimms6-1, 3-1
L#2 DoublesHeather Stenmark / Michele Ihlanfeldt vs Soraya McTeague / Colleen Stover6-4, 4-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesJill Siegel vs Jean Maren1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesElaine Ni / Laurie Seward vs Kim Richards / Sue DeMari2-6, 6-4, 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 standings4 teams · E
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA W 40&OW4.5 4.Naperville Blaauw Sat 4 $2472221433283
2CDTA W 40&OW4.5 1.Tam Jurczyk Sat 4 $2263241235292
3CDTA W 40&OW4.5 3.Glenbrook Burns Sat 3 $2554181841293
4CDTA W 40&OW4.5 2.Glenbrook Ueda Sun 11 $250982857381

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 4.06 estimated across 19 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.

4.33
Colette Gramins
published 4.5
4.27
Elaine Ni
published 4.5
4.27
Emily Shamrock
published 4.5
4.26
Mary DaVanti
published 4.5
4.16
Lisa Musgrave
published 4.5
4.15
Laura Levin
usually #1 Singles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
4.13
4.13
Penny Heuer
published 4.5
4.12
Heike Spahn
published 4.5
4.08
Christine Meade
published 4.5
4.07
Heather Stenmark
published 4.5
4.03
Jill Siegel
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
4.00
Michele Ihlanfeldt
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.97
Kerry Nowicki
published 4.5
3.94
Laura Seaman
published
3.88
Laurie Seward
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.86
Amanda Ellsworth
published 4.5
3.80
Jean Soh
published 4
3.66
Priscilla Ewaldz
published 4
Elizabeth Burns
published
Jennifer Micon
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Sophia Naiditch
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.

Elaine Ni + Heike Spahn7262% games+11.8% vs expected
Laura Seaman + Michele Ihlanfeldt8455% games+8.0% vs expected
Janet Rauschenberger + Sophia Naiditch8163% games+2.9% vs expected
Jean Soh + Kerry Nowicki8452% games+2.1% vs expected
Heather Stenmark + Laura Seaman211553% games+1.8% vs expected
Kerry Nowicki + Penny Heuer6155% games+1.7% vs expected
Elaine Ni + Janet Rauschenberger4648% games+0.9% vs expected
Heather Stenmark + Mary DaVanti3252% games+0.4% 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.

4.5
Colette Gramins
69W–40L career · no lines in 2025
1%88%11%
4.33
4.5
Elaine Ni
61W–42L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
4.27
4.5
Emily Shamrock
123W–81L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
4.27
4.5
Mary DaVanti
111W–50L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
4.26
4.5
Lisa Musgrave
202W–113L career · no lines in 2025
13%86%1%
4.16
Laura Levin
38W–30L career · 6 lines in 2025
14%85%1%
4.15
4.5
Janet Rauschenberger
44W–36L career · no lines in 2025
17%82%<1%
4.13
4.5
Penny Heuer
94W–53L career · no lines in 2025
17%82%<1%
4.13
4.5
Heike Spahn
161W–144L career · no lines in 2025
21%79%<1%
4.12
4.5
Christine Meade
273W–175L career · no lines in 2025
29%71%<1%
4.08
4.5
Heather Stenmark
266W–253L career · no lines in 2025
30%70%<1%
4.07
Jill Siegel
70W–67L career · 2 lines in 2025
42%58%<1%
4.03
Michele Ihlanfeldt
88W–115L career · 3 lines in 2025
49%51%<1%
4.00
4.5
Kerry Nowicki
91W–109L career · no lines in 2025
59%41%<1%
3.97
Laura Seaman
74W–58L career · no lines in 2025
<1%66%34%
3.94
Laurie Seward
35W–59L career · 5 lines in 2025
81%19%<1%
3.88
4.5
Amanda Ellsworth
47W–69L career · no lines in 2025
85%15%<1%
3.86
4
Jean Soh
455W–271L career · no lines in 2025
2%91%7%
3.80
4
Priscilla Ewaldz
145W–184L career · no lines in 2025
13%87%1%
3.66
Elizabeth Burns
28W–40L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Jennifer Micon
1W–19L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Sophia Naiditch
22W–9L career · 1 line 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.