Teams

OC:Leveille:Leveille/Leveille

2022 Cape Mixed 55 & Over · 7.0 Mixed Flt 1

16 players · average NTRP 3.50 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

View scouting list →
Schedule
Flight standings2 teams · 7.0 Mixed Flt 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1OC:Leveille:Leveille/Leveille73171331245
2MCAC:Kenny:Kenny/Napoli37131738282

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 3.24 estimated across 8 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.

3.92
James Veninger
usually #1 Doubles 89%, also #2 Doubles 11% · published 4
Desiree Mobed
usually #2 Doubles 56%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.35
Gerald Haigh
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.34
Betsy Casey
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.18
Diane Lande
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.15
David Bernstein
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.06
Laura Leveille
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.04
Lauren Labelle
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
2.87
Irving Epstein
usually #2 Doubles 42%, also #1 Doubles 32% · published 3
Christine Cook
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Beth Riso
published
Jeffrey Vivian
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published
Jon Porkka
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 44% · published
Michael Leveille
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Nancy Whitehurst
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Tia Lilly
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.

James Veninger + Tia Lilly22857% gamesnot enough data
Christine Cook + James Veninger16462% gamesnot enough data
Desiree Mobed + Irving Epstein7455% gamesnot enough data
Jeffrey Vivian + Betsy Casey5654% gamesnot enough data
Michael Leveille + Laura Leveille6451% gamesnot enough data
Jeffrey Vivian + Nancy Whitehurst6359% gamesnot enough data
Gerald Haigh + Laura Leveille4156% gamesnot enough data
Diane Lande + David Bernstein2349% gamesnot 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.

4
James Veninger
141W–36L career · 9 lines in 2022
<1%73%27%
3.92
4
Desiree Mobed
33W–28L career · 9 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Gerald Haigh
78W–49L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%87%13%
3.35
3.5
Betsy Casey
68W–49L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%89%11%
3.34
3.5
Diane Lande
30W–28L career · 6 lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.18
3.5
David Bernstein
48W–39L career · 6 lines in 2022
12%88%<1%
3.15
Laura Leveille
54W–49L career · 6 lines in 2022
32%67%<1%
3.06
Lauren Labelle
47W–65L career · 7 lines in 2022
39%61%<1%
3.04
3
Irving Epstein
52W–45L career · 19 lines in 2022
<1%84%16%
2.87
3
Christine Cook
53W–12L career · 12 lines in 2022
not enough data
Beth Riso
9W–5L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Jeffrey Vivian
30W–50L career · 7 lines in 2022
not enough data
Jon Porkka
26W–43L career · 9 lines in 2022
not enough data
Michael Leveille
26W–21L career · 14 lines in 2022
not enough data
Nancy Whitehurst
99W–101L career · 9 lines in 2022
not enough data
Tia Lilly
51W–35L career · no lines in 2022
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.