Teams

NJD/Acing Gracefully

Adult 55 & Over Summer · 6.0 Women - Central Day

12 players · average NTRP 2.93 / NEW JERSEY

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2024-08-01vs Sweet WarriorsWon 21
W#1 DoublesSusan Desilva / Jill Schulz vs Doreen Kelly / Marcia Cohen1-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMarlene Mannion / Ana Shah vs Catherine Suydam / Marguerite Portagallo3-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesJudy Singleton / Barbara Wilson vs Nancy Nicola / Laurie Goldzweig2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2024-07-25vs Sweet WarriorsWon 21
W#1 DoublesNanci Levine / Marlene Mannion vs Laurie Goldzweig / Mary Ricardo6-7, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSusan Gilli / Suzanne Proulx vs Catherine Suydam / Doreen Kelly0-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesCatherine Taaffe / Ana Shah vs Judy Sarvary / Erika Verschelde6-1, 6-3
2024-07-18vs Sweet WarriorsLost 12
W#1 DoublesJill Schulz / Susan Desilva vs Susan Harrison / Nancy Nicola6-1, 6-1
L#2 DoublesBarbara Wilson / Judy Singleton vs Marcia Cohen / Catherine Suydam5-7, 3-6
L#3 DoublesCatherine Taaffe / Jeanne Dicicco vs Helen Milner / Erika Verschelde3-6, 4-6
2024-07-11vs Sweet WarriorsWon 21
L#1 DoublesAna Shah / Linda Haderer vs Marcia Cohen / Doreen Kelly3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesJill Schulz / Susan Desilva vs Helen Milner / Erika Verschelde6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesNanci Levine / Marlene Mannion vs Marguerite Portagallo / Susan Harrison6-2, 6-3
2024-06-27vs Sweet WarriorsLost 12
L#1 DoublesJill Schulz / Ana Shah vs Doreen Kelly / Marcia Cohen2-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesJudy Singleton / Barbara Wilson vs Mary Ricardo / Laurie Goldzweig6-2, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSusan Gilli / Suzanne Proulx vs Helen Milner / Erika Verschelde1-6, 0-6
2024-06-20vs Sweet WarriorsLost 12
W#1 DoublesJill Schulz / Ana Shah vs Catherine Suydam / Marcia Cohen3-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#2 DoublesNanci Levine / Linda Haderer vs Laurie Goldzweig / Mary Ricardo4-6, 5-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesCatherine Taaffe / Jeanne Dicicco vs Helen Milner / Erika Verschelde2-6, 2-6
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 standings1 teams · 6.0 Women - Central Day
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NJD/Acing Gracefully069923172

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 2.64 estimated across 11 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.

2.94
Ana Shah
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.87
Susan Desilva
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.87
Judy Singleton
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.80
Nanci Levine
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.80
Linda Haderer
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.79
Marlene Mannion
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
Barbara Wilson
published 3
2.73
Jill Schulz
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
2.50
Catherine Taaffe
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.33
Suzanne Proulx
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.33
Jeanne Dicicco
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.04
Susan Gilli
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
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.

Judy Singleton + Marlene Mannion5073% games+17.9% vs expected
Barbara Wilson + Marlene Mannion5256% games+13.9% vs expected
Catherine Taaffe + Ana Shah6456% games+10.1% vs expected
Susan Desilva + Jill Schulz18461% games+7.1% vs expected
Ana Shah + Judy Singleton5355% games+3.5% vs expected
Nanci Levine + Marlene Mannion3252% games+3.5% vs expected
Catherine Taaffe + Marlene Mannion31345% games+2.1% vs expected
Nanci Levine + Linda Haderer151654% games+2.1% 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.

3
Ana Shah
45W–40L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%67%33%
2.94
Susan Desilva
24W–6L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%84%16%
2.87
Judy Singleton
47W–45L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%84%15%
2.87
3
Nanci Levine
104W–196L career · 3 lines in 2024
1%93%6%
2.80
3
Linda Haderer
116W–150L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%93%6%
2.80
3
Marlene Mannion
90W–80L career · 3 lines in 2024
1%93%5%
2.79
3
Barbara Wilson
60W–87L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Jill Schulz
104W–67L career · 5 lines in 2024
4%94%2%
2.73
3
Catherine Taaffe
110W–167L career · type A · 3 lines in 2024
48%52%<1%
2.50
Suzanne Proulx
27W–40L career · 2 lines in 2024
91%9%<1%
2.33
Jeanne Dicicco
45W–58L career · 2 lines in 2024
91%9%<1%
2.33
2.5
Susan Gilli
56W–81L career · 2 lines in 2024
0%>99%<1%
2.04

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.