Teams

NITA W 75CWb TAM (Farinas)

2022 NITA2 Winter Combo · NITA Winter 7.5 Combo Women

18 players · average NTRP 3.91 / NORTHERN ILLINOIS

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 →
Schedule6 played
2022-05-07Won 20
W#2 DoublesDena Balzano / Danielle Balzano vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesMarjorie Baltazar / Courtney Tornow vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-05-01Won 10
W#1 DoublesAngela Anglin Weathers / Tina Dandridge vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#1 DoublesCourtney Tornow / Patricia Bustamante vs Jody Sternberg / Jennifer Giertsen6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJean Soh / Patty Lynch vs Elisa Zusman / Rosemary Wheeler5-7, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesDenise Lam / Jennifer Peck vs Jennifer Calliss / Narissa Breger4-6, 4-6
W#1 DoublesJean Soh / Patty Lynch vs Sara Olson / Veronica Lidral6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesRebecca Daly / Elleson Song vs Tracey Rubach / J Mosca6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesDena Balzano / Danielle Balzano vs Katie Jones / Tripti Burt6-3, 3-6, 1-0
L#1 DoublesAngela Anglin Weathers / Tina Dandridge vs Catherine Wasylenko / Zagorka James4-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesChristine Campanelli / Patricia Bustamante vs Diedre Castaldo / Vera McCray7-5, 6-3
W#3 DoublesShari Glickman / Martha Davis vs Becky Sharp / Allycn Grcevic6-0, 6-3
L#1 DoublesSue Lehrer / Elleson Song vs Martha Skryd / Mary Ellen Young6-3, 3-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesChristine Campanelli / Patricia Bustamante vs Amy Harper / Dorothy OMalley6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesCourtney Tornow / Marjorie Baltazar vs Tavia Young / Gozde Ertas6-0, 6-2
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 standings for NITA Winter 7.5 Combo Women have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.68 estimated across 12 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.

4.33
Christine Campanelli
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 4.5
3.92
Elleson Song
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.84
Danielle Balzano
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.82
Jean Soh
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.79
Angela Anglin Weathers
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
Courtney Tornow
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.65
Patricia Bustamante
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.61
Denise Lam
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.56
Martha Davis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.51
Rebecca Daly
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.49
Marjorie Baltazar
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.46
Shari Glickman
published
3.22
Tina Dandridge
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Dena Balzano
published
Jennifer Peck
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Patty Lynch
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Sue Lehrer
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Sue Lehrer + Christine Campanelli23368% games+14.2% vs expected
Christine Campanelli + Jennifer Peck11363% games+13.3% vs expected
Jean Soh + Marjorie Baltazar10364% games+10.7% vs expected
Fra Angelica Farinas- Wright + Denise Lam5263% games+9.7% vs expected
Martha Davis + Rebecca Daly7260% games+6.7% vs expected
Jean Soh + Martha Davis4356% games+3.6% vs expected
Danielle Balzano + Martha Davis8455% games−1.2% vs expected
Martha Davis + Courtney Tornow6551% games−3.4% 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
Christine Campanelli
302W–137L career · 7 lines in 2022
1%90%10%
4.33
4
Elleson Song
87W–29L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%72%28%
3.92
4
Danielle Balzano
132W–52L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%89%10%
3.84
4
Jean Soh
468W–283L career · 5 lines in 2022
1%91%8%
3.82
4
Angela Anglin Weathers
130W–94L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.79
4
Courtney Tornow
69W–32L career · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Patricia Bustamante
123W–102L career · 3 lines in 2022
12%88%<1%
3.65
3.5
Denise Lam
320W–95L career · 1 line in 2022
<1%20%80%
3.61
Martha Davis
349W–162L career · 4 lines in 2022
33%67%<1%
3.56
Rebecca Daly
129W–147L career · 3 lines in 2022
48%52%<1%
3.51
4
Marjorie Baltazar
183W–85L career · 2 lines in 2022
54%46%<1%
3.49
Shari Glickman
65W–49L career · no lines in 2022
<1%61%39%
3.46
3.5
Fra Angelica Farinas- Wright
70W–29L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Tina Dandridge
108W–87L career · 2 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.22
Dena Balzano
10W–8L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Jennifer Peck
115W–55L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Patty Lynch
28W–31L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sue Lehrer
84W–23L career · 4 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.