Teams

CDTA W 40&OW4.0 10.Nielsen Sheridan Sat 4 $22

CDTA 1Winter 40 & Over W · E

19 players · average NTRP 4.00 / 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 →
Schedule7 played
W#2 DoublesKatrin Maldre / Emily Paris vs Erin Baker / Jane Ford6-4, 6-1
L#1 SinglesSara Olson vs Iva Gregorova1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesJane Moon / Linh Bailey vs Bela Starkman / Julie Steinberg0-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesKrista Klund vs Ellen Angeletti1-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesSara Olson / Michelle Parks vs Catherine Battin / Patty Kulpins6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesKatrin Maldre / Emily Paris vs Kristen Lay / Karen Tompkins6-1, 6-1
L#3 DoublesPatricia Lozada / Tory Day vs Christi Cashman / Katerina Hickey2-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#3 DoublesSara Olson / Rebecca Kosner vs Debra Brambora / Diane McKillen6-3, 6-4
W#1 DoublesCris Montresor / Sara Olson vs Lara Phillips / Erin Wyatt6-2, 3-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesKrista Klund vs Svetlana Petrova6-4, 2-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJanine Sheridan / Carlene Motto vs Karen Whitebloom / Yumi Ida3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesLinh Bailey / Patricia Lozada vs Terra Jahns / Anitra Willis4-6, 3-6
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 standings13 teams · E
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA W 40&OW4.0 12.MTB Meng Sat 2 $2711140822326
2CDTA W 40&OW4.0 10.Nielsen Sheridan Sat 4 $22102321638319
3CDTA W 40&OW4.0 5.Tam Lund Sun 1 $2293351333302
4CDTA W 40&OW4.0 7.Barr Willis Sat 3 $2784291940364
5CDTA W 40&OW4.0 4.Tam Corey Sun 11 $2284282045360
6CDTA W 40&OW4.0 6.Barr Gray Sat 9 $2766212762425
7CDTA W 40&OW4.0 8.RT Jasinski Sun 6 $2757222659444
8CDTA W 40&OW4.0 3.Hins Cashman Sun 4:30 $2248222654387
9CDTA W 40&OW4.0 9.FV Hayashida Sat 4 $2548212758423
10CDTA W 40&OW4.0 13.Gnbk Hans Sat 1 $3048143474483
11CDTA W 40&OW4.0 2.Nielsen Burnside Sat 4 $2539183061441
12CDTA W 40&OW4.0 1.RT Fuller Sun 12 $2739183068470
13CDTA W 40&OW4.0 11.Oak Sujack Sat 5 $2839123673456

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 3.70 estimated across 17 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.

4.01
Cris Montresor
published 4
3.97
Mira Struck
published 4
3.93
Leigh Keyser
published 4
3.93
Sara Desai
usually #1 Doubles 90%, also #2 Doubles 10% · published
3.90
Katrin Maldre
published 4
3.83
Rebecca Kosner
published 4
3.80
Joanne Lund
published 4
3.75
Sara Olson
usually #1 Doubles 25%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.71
Emily Paris
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.65
Carlene Motto
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.58
Krista Klund
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.56
Andrea Carrier
published 4
3.56
Linh Bailey
published 4
3.54
Janine Sheridan
published 4
3.49
Yarina Birnbaum
published 4
3.35
Patricia Lozada
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.31
Jane Moon
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Michelle Parks
published
Patricia Nelson
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.

Katrin Maldre + Sara Desai3257% games+13.3% vs expected
Leigh Keyser + Sara Desai12362% games+8.7% vs expected
Yarina Birnbaum + Joanne Lund18363% games+4.0% vs expected
Linh Bailey + Joanne Lund4158% games+3.7% vs expected
Janine Sheridan + Joanne Lund4847% games−5.8% vs expected
Carlene Motto + Joanne Lund0544% gamesnot enough data
Katrin Maldre + Emily Paris404 matchesnot enough data
Janine Sheridan + Yarina Birnbaum224 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.

4
Cris Montresor
37W–27L career · no lines in 2026
<1%47%53%
4.01
4
Mira Struck
41W–6L career · no lines in 2026
<1%58%42%
3.97
4
Leigh Keyser
98W–48L career · type A · no lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
3.93
Sara Desai
55W–34L career · 10 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.93
4
Katrin Maldre
109W–82L career · no lines in 2026
<1%76%23%
3.90
4
Rebecca Kosner
96W–53L career · no lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.83
4
Joanne Lund
172W–88L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.80
Sara Olson
131W–57L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%<1%>99%
3.75
Emily Paris
57W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.71
4
Carlene Motto
107W–113L career · 1 line in 2026
14%86%1%
3.65
Krista Klund
26W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%29%71%
3.58
4
Andrea Carrier
19W–24L career · no lines in 2026
34%66%<1%
3.56
4
Linh Bailey
56W–52L career · no lines in 2026
35%65%<1%
3.56
4
Janine Sheridan
65W–64L career · no lines in 2026
38%62%<1%
3.54
4
Yarina Birnbaum
69W–62L career · no lines in 2026
54%46%<1%
3.49
Patricia Lozada
152W–132L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%86%14%
3.35
Jane Moon
28W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
1%90%8%
3.31
Michelle Parks
45W–26L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Patricia Nelson
106W–45L career · no lines in 2026
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.