Teams

CDTA S 40&OW3.5 a.River Trails Cox Sun 6 $24

CDTA Summer Adult 40 & Over WE · WN

17 players · average NTRP 3.44 / 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
L#1 DoublesJamie Burns / Diane Ramoska vs Paula Grabow Duignan / Agnieszka Fijol3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesJessica Vahey / Dina DeLaurentis vs Emily Lund / Sharon Kerr-Zygmunt4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesSusan Evans / Michelle Charles vs Alicia Arrick / Karen McClure4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesSandra Villa / Michelle Charles vs Svetlana Kanev / Lesley Bantle2-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesErin Baker / Jessica Vahey vs Lynn Meyer / Diane Egan4-6, 5-7
W#1 SinglesEllen Angeletti vs Jackie Kunzler6-0, 6-0
L#2 DoublesRachel Fuller / Michelle Charles vs Cheryl Ingram / Laurie Sandman2-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesTracy Stronsky / Diane Ramoska vs Barbara Morrison / Lori Raffone4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesJamie Burns / Erin Baker vs Patricia Lozada / Diane Thomason1-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#1 DoublesDiane Ramoska / Michelle Charles vs Joanne Lund / Hilary Hoye2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJamie Burns / Rachel Fuller vs Rosa Broseman / Janine Sheridan6-7, 5-7
L#1 DoublesJamie Burns / Rachel Fuller vs Donna Myers / Robin Funk6-4, 2-4, 0-1
W#1 DoublesJamie Burns / Rachel Fuller vs SoYoung Grote / Apple Naughton6-2, 7-5
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 standings9 teams · WN
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA S 40&OW3.5 c.Nielsen Lund Sun 3 $208028410161
2CDTA S 40&OW3.5 b.MT Bann Christianson Sun 10 $2562191331247
3CDTA S 40&OW3.5 d.Northbrook Greenberg Sun 6 $2453191331249
4CDTA S 40&OW3.5 i.TF Oak Park Roberts Sat 9 $2453151739261
5CDTA S 40&OW3.5 e.Heritage Morrison Tue 7 $2144181430237
6CDTA S 40&OW3.5 g.Tam Lund Thur 7 $2235171532266
7CDTA S 40&OW3.5 f.Tam Kanev Thur 7 $2235141841277
8CDTA S 40&OW3.5 a.River Trails Cox Sun 6 $2426141841284
9CDTA S 40&OW3.5 h.XS Wilson Sat 9 $220803264384

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 3.16 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.

3.76
Ellen Angeletti
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.47
Rachel Fuller
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.41
Jamie Burns
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.39
Sherry Polachek
published 3.5
3.28
Martha Billen
published 3.5
3.27
Diane Ramoska
published 3.5
3.26
Jessica Vahey
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Erin Baker
published 3.5
3.16
Tracy Stronsky
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.13
Sandra Villa
published 3.5
2.88
2.85
Dina DeLaurentis
published 3
2.74
Michelle Charles
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.43
Liz Cox
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
Nayna Patel
usually #3 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Rebecca Wagner
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Yan Gao
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #1 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.

Jamie Burns + Rachel Fuller10559% games+14.2% vs expected
Martha Billen + Michelle Charles7944% games+4.1% vs expected
Rebecca Wagner + Nayna Patel3545% games−7.0% vs expected
Martha Billen + Tracy Stronsky3851% gamesnot enough data
Jamie Burns + Erin Baker3451% gamesnot enough data
Tracy Stronsky + Sherry Polachek3446% gamesnot enough data
Liz Cox + Martha Billen2340% gamesnot enough data
Jamie Burns + Martha Billen224 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
Ellen Angeletti
23W–14L career · 1 line in 2023
2%94%3%
3.76
Rachel Fuller
43W–50L career · 4 lines in 2023
59%41%<1%
3.47
3.5
Jamie Burns
60W–43L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%75%25%
3.41
3.5
Sherry Polachek
138W–76L career · no lines in 2023
<1%80%19%
3.39
3.5
Martha Billen
59W–64L career · no lines in 2023
2%94%4%
3.28
3.5
Diane Ramoska
44W–50L career · no lines in 2023
2%94%4%
3.27
Jessica Vahey
41W–25L career · 2 lines in 2023
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Erin Baker
21W–14L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Tracy Stronsky
64W–59L career · 1 line in 2023
10%89%<1%
3.16
3.5
Sandra Villa
84W–79L career · no lines in 2023
16%84%<1%
3.13
3
Michelle Nacheman
77W–96L career · no lines in 2023
<1%83%17%
2.88
3
Dina DeLaurentis
53W–64L career · no lines in 2023
<1%87%12%
2.85
Michelle Charles
30W–50L career · 4 lines in 2023
3%94%2%
2.74
Liz Cox
29W–59L career · 6 lines in 2023
70%30%<1%
2.43
Nayna Patel
10W–21L career · 7 lines in 2023
not enough data
Rebecca Wagner
9W–14L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Yan Gao
77W–64L career · 6 lines in 2023
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.