Teams

CDTA W 40&OW4.5 2.Centennial Corey Sun 1 $20

CDTA 2Winter 40 & Over W · E

19 players · average NTRP 4.32 / 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 →
Schedule9 played
2024-05-04Lost 01
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Burns / Colleen Stover vs Jennifer Nemec / Jane Girard4-6, 3-6
W#1 SinglesJill Siegel vs Rachel Stein7-6, 6-5
W#2 DoublesJanet Rauschenberger / Laurie Seward vs Laura Ulrich / Elizabeth Kulakofsky6-2, 7-6
W#1 DoublesHeike Spahn / Laurie Seward vs Denise Mullett / Holly Schleizer6-4, 5-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAmanda Ellsworth / Colleen Stover vs Lisa Lowenthal / Laura Ulrich6-4, 3-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesElizabeth Burns / Alison Donnelly vs Rachel Stein / Desiree Witte7-6, 1-6, 0-1
W#1 DoublesChristine Campanelli / Susan DiMagno vs Elizabeth Kulakofsky / Roberta Louis Goodman6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesColette Gramins / Maureen Porter vs Jane Girard / Masako Ueda6-1, 6-3
W#1 DoublesChristine Campanelli / Laurie Seward vs Laura Levin / Suzanne Beu6-2, 7-5
W#2 DoublesColette Gramins / Maureen Porter vs Laura Ulrich / Lisa Lowenthal4-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#1 DoublesLaurie Seward / Heike Spahn vs Laura Levin / Olga Ovnanyan1-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesJill Siegel / Elizabeth Burns vs Leigh Keyser / Suzanne Beu6-2, 6-2
L#1 DoublesChristine Campanelli / Laurie Seward vs Laura Levin / Olga Ovnanyan7-5, 3-5, 0-1
W#3 DoublesMaureen Porter / Colleen Stover vs Leigh Keyser / Pamela Leichtling6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Burns / Susan DiMagno vs Olga Ovnanyan / Farrah Zick5-7, 1-3
L#1 DoublesSusan DiMagno / Laurie Seward vs Lisa Musgrave / Olga Ovnanyan2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAlison Donnelly / Ginger Riessen vs Bela Starkman / Rachel Stein3-6, 7-5, 1-0
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 standings2 teams · E
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA W 40&OW4.5 2.Centennial Corey Sun 1 $2054181840313
2CDTA W 40&OW4.5 1.Glenbrook Ueda Sat 9 $2545181843339

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 4.06 estimated across 15 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.

4.36
Colette Gramins
published 4.5
4.33
4.32
Susan DiMagno
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Erin Alvarez
published 4.5
4.21
Ruth Karakosta
usually #1 Singles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
4.20
4.14
Heike Spahn
published 4.5
4.11
Christine Meade
published 4.5
4.11
Heather Stenmark
published 4.5
4.08
Jill Siegel
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
4.00
Ginger Riessen
published 4
3.95
Colleen Stover
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.94
Laurie Seward
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
3.90
Amanda Ellsworth
published 4.5
3.84
Alison Donnelly
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
Allison Popper
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
Elizabeth Burns
published 4
3.47
Maria Lobo-Corey
published 3.5
Maureen Porter
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Maria Lobo-Corey + Jill Siegel4366% games+11.8% vs expected
Maureen Porter + Colleen Stover15269% games+10.6% vs expected
Christine Campanelli + Colette Gramins6165% games+7.7% vs expected
Maria Lobo-Corey + Christine Meade5361% games+6.3% vs expected
Heike Spahn + Christine Meade4352% games+2.9% vs expected
Amanda Ellsworth + Heike Spahn6457% games+2.1% vs expected
Heike Spahn + Laurie Seward4549% games+0.9% vs expected
Heike Spahn + Elizabeth Burns3750% games−0.8% 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.

4.5
Colette Gramins
70W–41L career · no lines in 2024
<1%85%15%
4.36
4.5
Christine Campanelli
302W–137L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%10%
4.33
Susan DiMagno
91W–66L career · 3 lines in 2024
1%91%9%
4.32
4.5
Erin Alvarez
45W–27L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Ruth Karakosta
80W–34L career · 6 lines in 2024
5%94%1%
4.21
4.5
Janet Rauschenberger
48W–39L career · no lines in 2024
6%93%1%
4.20
4.5
Heike Spahn
168W–151L career · no lines in 2024
14%86%<1%
4.14
4.5
Christine Meade
279W–180L career · no lines in 2024
20%80%<1%
4.11
4.5
Heather Stenmark
278W–260L career · no lines in 2024
21%79%<1%
4.11
Jill Siegel
84W–79L career · 2 lines in 2024
27%73%<1%
4.08
4
Ginger Riessen
244W–127L career · no lines in 2024
<1%49%51%
4.00
4.5
Colleen Stover
89W–46L career · 3 lines in 2024
65%35%<1%
3.95
Laurie Seward
42W–66L career · 6 lines in 2024
69%31%<1%
3.94
4.5
Amanda Ellsworth
47W–69L career · no lines in 2024
77%23%<1%
3.90
4.5
Alison Donnelly
119W–95L career · 2 lines in 2024
89%11%<1%
3.84
4
Allison Popper
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
4
Elizabeth Burns
34W–41L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Maria Lobo-Corey
276W–244L career · no lines in 2024
<1%59%41%
3.47
Maureen Porter
108W–28L career · 3 lines in 2024
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.