Teams

EXE:Ignjic:Nieskoski

2022 NH Adult 18 & Over Women Weekend · Diva 2.5

2 players · average NTRP / NEW HAMPSHIRE

View scouting list →
Schedule12 played
2022-01-22vs YMCA:Brunet:ErgasWon 10
W#1 DoublesMaja Ignjic / Kimberly Nieskoski vs Robyn Brunet / Patricia Ergas8-4
2022-01-22vs YMCA:Gauthier:RadkeLost 01
L#1 DoublesMaja Ignjic / Kimberly Nieskoski vs Nikki Gauthier / Taylor Radke3-8
2021-12-05vs GB:Reed:MinerWon 10
W#1 DoublesDarby Bruno / Maja Ignjic vs Kathryn Barton / Nancy Riccio6-1, 7-5
2021-11-14vs YMCA:Gauthier:RadkeLost 01
L#1 DoublesHeather Carroll / Kimberly Nieskoski vs Nikki Gauthier / Taylor Radke0-6, 1-6
2021-11-07vs YMCA:Pagliuca:WrightWon 10
W#2 DoublesMaja Ignjic / Kremena Star vs Lindsay Smart / Abigail Rogers6-1, 6-2
2021-10-31vs EXE:Bruno:KarrWon 10
W#1 DoublesTracy Healey / Kimberly Nieskoski vs Maggie Tipping / Grada-Anjo Wunderl6-3, 6-3
2021-10-17vs YMCA:Gauthier:RadkeLost 01
L#1 DoublesMaja Ignjic / Patty Kiely vs Taylor Radke / Jennifer Charron6-4, 1-6, 0-1
2021-10-17vs YMCA:Pagliuca:ZhanWon 10
W#1 DoublesKassandra Fish / Kimberly Nieskoski vs Marge Pagliuca / Ying Zhan6-3, 7-5
2021-10-03vs YMCA:Brunet:ErgasWon 10
W#2 DoublesHeather Carroll / Kimberly Nieskoski vs Robyn Brunet / Maria Berry3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2021-09-26vs EXE:Bruno:KarrSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMandi Barwell / Kimberly Nieskoski vs Kelly Karr / Maggie Tipping3-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesMaja Ignjic / Kremena Star vs Kassandra Fish / Heather Carroll2-6, 6-4, 1-0
2021-09-19vs GB:Reed:MinerWon 10
W#2 DoublesRegina Dixon / Kimberly Nieskoski vs Nancy Riccio / Jacqueline Wolters5-7, 7-5, 1-0
2021-09-19vs YMCA:Brunet:ErgasLost 01
L#2 DoublesMaja Ignjic / Patty Kiely vs Robyn Brunet / Karen Meteyer5-7, 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 standings6 teams · Diva 2.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1YMCA:Pagliuca:Zhan2020012
2YMCA:Gauthier:Radke202006
3EXE:Ignjic:Nieskoski1111112
4EXE:Barwell:Carroll1111112
5YMCA:Brunet:Ergas0202216
6YMCA:Bax:Mellish0202217

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.

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.

Kimberly Nieskoski
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Maja Ignjic
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · 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.

Kimberly Nieskoski + Maja Ignjic4254% games+3.7% 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.

Kimberly Nieskoski
18W–14L career · 8 lines in 2022
not enough data
Maja Ignjic
24W–17L career · 7 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.