Teams

CIN C 7.5W PATC Ackerman

Fall CIN Indy Combo Adult · CIN Indianapolis Combo 7.5 Women, F

16 players · average NTRP 3.40 / CENTRAL INDIANA

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 →
Schedule11 played
2025-12-07vs CIN C 7.5W IUTC CoghlanLost 12
L#1 DoublesCynthia Rathjen / Theresa McMahon vs Kate Bode / Sung-Mi Im2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesKaren Karwath / Joanna Cieciek vs Khadija Stewart / Martha Lenthe0-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesDarci Ackerman / Helena Fleenor vs Seung-Kyung Kim / Danielle Johnson6-4, 6-3
2025-11-23vs CIN C 7.5W IRCD DeckardLost 02
L#1 DoublesAdrienne Snoddy / Joanna Cieciek vs Wei Wang / Yating Jiang2-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesKathleen Eldridge / Theresa McMahon vs Amy Deckard / Melissa Warth3-6, 0-6
2025-11-16vs CIN C 7.5W CRC GatesLost 12
L#1 DoublesLauren Arthur / Kelly Olsen vs Jenny Huber / Elizabeth Rushton7-5, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJoanna Cieciek / Jennifer Garland vs Susan Gates / Marissa Sindelar6-2, 6-4
L#3 DoublesKaren Karwath / Roxane Sperber vs Peggy Hogan / Terri Shea6-4, 3-6, 0-1
2025-11-09vs CIN C 7.5W CRC KimLost 12
L#1 DoublesCynthia Rathjen / Helena Fleenor vs Somer Compton / Melinda Brueggemann2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesJoanna Cieciek / Kelly Olsen vs Jayne Guerrieri / Ann Meunier2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesAdrienne Snoddy / Darci Ackerman vs Kimberly Andersen / Karen Fennerty1-6, 3-6
2025-11-02vs CIN C 7.5W IRCD FaulkenbergLost 02
L#1 DoublesRoxane Sperber / Cynthia Rathjen vs Mariko Tsuyuki / Erica Curtiss1-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesJennifer Garland / Katie Bailey vs Elizabeth Lacy / Laura Combs7-6, 3-6, 0-1
2025-10-26vs CIN C 7.5W IRCD LaneLost 03
L#1 DoublesJennifer Garland / Katie Dillon vs Karyn ODonnell / Allison Gritton1-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesAdrienne Snoddy / Helena Fleenor vs Lucy Lane / Paula Deemer3-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesLori McPike / Darci Ackerman vs Maura Lee / Erin Young5-7, 1-6
2025-10-19vs CIN C 7.5W IRCD HittleLost 03
L#1 DoublesJoanna Cieciek / Kelly Olsen vs Lisa Radez / Jill Tallman4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesTheresa McMahon / Roxane Sperber vs Tina Coleman / Cecilia Perez Moreno4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesKaren Karwath / Helena Fleenor vs Lisa Schneider / Gilda Escobar1-6, 2-6
2025-10-12vs CIN C 7.5W IRCD DaltonSplit 11
W#1 DoublesKelly Olsen / Joanna Cieciek vs Jennifer Skulski / Stacy Davis2-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKathleen Eldridge / Lori McPike vs Mary Coyne / Vickie Melcher2-6, 3-6
2025-10-05vs CIN C 7.5W IRCD PruittLost 03
L#1 DoublesLori McPike / Jennifer Garland vs ANN KEATON / Stefanie Horwitz0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesAdrienne Snoddy / Joanna Cieciek vs Lesley Cahalan / Tracy Miller2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesCynthia Rathjen / Bethany Morningstar vs Nicola Frazer / Jessica Bradbury1-6, 2-6
2025-09-28vs CIN C 7.5W IRCD BrownLost 03
L#1 DoublesKelly Olsen / Kathleen Eldridge vs Shelby Ackerman / Raquel Richardson1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesAdrienne Snoddy / Bethany Morningstar vs Carrie Frizzell / Rachel Dyer4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesRoxane Sperber / Theresa McMahon vs Katie Filler / Sarah Brown1-6, 2-6
2025-09-21vs CIN C 7.5W CRC LynchLost 03
L#1 DoublesJoanna Cieciek / Katie Bailey vs Anna Koval / Allison Newman2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesDarci Ackerman / Jennifer Garland vs Susan Nixon / Meryl Schroeder0-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesHelena Fleenor / Adrienne Snoddy vs Sarah Lynch / Kelle Hennessee5-7, 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 standings12 teams · CIN Indianapolis Combo 7.5 Women, F
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CIN C 7.5W IRCD Brown10126719217
2CIN C 7.5W CRC Lynch9225823256
3CIN C 7.5W IRCD Pruitt8325819216
4CIN C 7.5W IUTC Coghlan83181538300
5CIN C 7.5W IRCD Faulkenberg65171635279
6CIN C 7.5W IRCD Deckard65171638302
7CIN C 7.5W IRCD Hittle56181532284
8CIN C 7.5W CRC Kim56161738297
9CIN C 7.5W CRC Gates47122150347
10CIN C 7.5W IRCD Lane38102349337
11CIN C 7.5W IRCD Dalton11052857357
12CIN C 7.5W PATC Ackerman01162756356

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 3.23 estimated across 13 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.

3.67
Katie Dillon
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.35
Joanna Cieciek
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.35
Kathleen Eldridge
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.29
Kelly Olsen
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.27
Helena Fleenor
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.22
Jennifer Garland
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.21
Darci Ackerman
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.21
Theresa McMahon
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.20
Adrienne Snoddy
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.15
Lori McPike
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.11
Bethany Morningstar
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
3.06
Karen Karwath
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.92
Cynthia Rathjen
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Katie Bailey
published
Lauren Arthur
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Roxane Sperber
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · 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.

Jennifer Garland + Kelly Olsen5351% games+2.1% vs expected
Kelly Olsen + Joanna Cieciek5647% games+1.3% vs expected
Jennifer Garland + Katie Dillon3637% games+0.1% vs expected
Jennifer Garland + Darci Ackerman81645% games−0.1% vs expected
Jennifer Garland + Lori McPike1536% games−2.4% vs expected
Jennifer Garland + Kathleen Eldridge3642% games−4.0% vs expected
Darci Ackerman + Lori McPike31242% games−6.2% vs expected
Theresa McMahon + Cynthia Rathjen2434% games−12.8% 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.

Katie Dillon
27W–19L career · 1 line in 2025
10%90%1%
3.67
Joanna Cieciek
16W–19L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%86%13%
3.35
Kathleen Eldridge
27W–40L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%87%13%
3.35
Kelly Olsen
22W–31L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Helena Fleenor
20W–16L career · 8 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.27
Jennifer Garland
37W–78L career · 5 lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.22
3.5
Darci Ackerman
35W–72L career · 4 lines in 2025
5%93%1%
3.21
Theresa McMahon
30W–63L career · 4 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.21
3.5
Adrienne Snoddy
8W–19L career · 6 lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.20
Lori McPike
23W–51L career · 3 lines in 2025
13%87%<1%
3.15
3
Bethany Morningstar
17W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%20%80%
3.11
Karen Karwath
18W–42L career · 3 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.06
3.5
Cynthia Rathjen
20W–56L career · 4 lines in 2025
74%26%<1%
2.92
Katie Bailey
10W–13L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Lauren Arthur
0W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Roxane Sperber
7W–21L career · 4 lines 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.