Teams

NITA W 50TLWb Schaumburg-Wright/Nakamura

2025 NITA2 Winterz Tri Level 18&O · NITA W Tri Level 18&O Women 40

18 players · average NTRP 4.38 / 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
2025-04-13vs NITA W 50TLWc Naperville-RichardsWon 10
W#1 DoublesMegan Nguyen / Alice Pacaut vs Susan DiMagno / Ainhoa Iglesias Diaz6-1, 6-1
2025-04-05vs NITA W 50TLWa Score-KnutteWon 10
W#1 DoublesMegan Nguyen / Tomomi Nagao vs Martina Wodzinski / Rebecca Bosack7-6, 4-2
2025-03-14vs NITA W 50TLWa Score-KnutteWon 10
W#1 DoublesMegan Nguyen / Alice Pacaut vs Dana Shannon / Cynthya Goulet6-1, 6-2
2025-02-23vs NITA W 50TLWc Naperville-RichardsWon 10
W#1 DoublesSarah Monteagudo / Tomomi Nagao vs Tammy Mitchell / Courtney Shuster6-1, 6-4
2025-02-22vs NITA W 50TLWc Naperville-RichardsWon 10
W#1 DoublesMegan Nguyen / Irina Dobin vs Tammy Mitchell / Courtney Shuster7-5, 6-1
2025-02-15vs NITA W 50TLWa Score-KnutteWon 10
W#1 DoublesIrina Dobin / Tomomi Nagao vs Liz Urban / Cynthya Goulet4-6, 6-4, 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 standings for NITA W Tri Level 18&O Women 40 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 4.35 estimated across 16 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.

5.03
Alice Pacaut
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.79
Megan Nguyen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.74
Tomomi Nagao
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.68
Sarah Monteagudo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.63
Irina Dobin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.53
Heather Mixon
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.42
Marialin Lomongo
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published 4.5
4.41
Ayano Nakamura
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4.5
4.40
Amanda Connell
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.31
Mary Therese Lee
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
4.22
Corinn Hanson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.12
Crystal Leighton
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.95
Dawn Baumann
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.92
Allison Goldberg
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.90
Kristine Jurczyk
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
3.56
Martha Davis
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 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.

Martha Davis + Crystal Leighton8075% games+21.6% vs expected
Sarah Monteagudo + Ayano Nakamura4163% games+13.7% vs expected
Martha Davis + Allison Goldberg9458% games+12.0% vs expected
Megan Nguyen + Alice Pacaut6363% games+9.1% vs expected
Martha Davis + Ayano Nakamura7059% games+7.6% vs expected
Allison Goldberg + Crystal Leighton5360% games+7.0% vs expected
Amanda Connell + Ayano Nakamura14162% games+3.2% vs expected
Kristine Jurczyk + Crystal Leighton4358% games+2.9% 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.

5
Alice Pacaut
143W–36L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%41%59%
5.03
Megan Nguyen
103W–41L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%94%5%
4.79
Tomomi Nagao
43W–16L career · 3 lines in 2025
3%95%2%
4.74
Sarah Monteagudo
62W–25L career · 1 line in 2025
8%91%1%
4.68
5
Irina Dobin
94W–47L career · 2 lines in 2025
16%84%<1%
4.63
4.5
Heather Mixon
49W–10L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%41%59%
4.53
4.5
Marialin Lomongo
324W–137L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%73%27%
4.42
4.5
Ayano Nakamura
331W–128L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%75%25%
4.41
4.5
Amanda Connell
102W–50L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%78%22%
4.40
Mary Therese Lee
212W–126L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
4.31
4.5
Corinn Hanson
120W–54L career · 4 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
4.22
4
Crystal Leighton
308W–80L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%19%81%
4.12
4
Dawn Baumann
397W–165L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%66%34%
3.95
4
Allison Goldberg
145W–90L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
3.92
4.5
Kristine Jurczyk
333W–130L career · 4 lines in 2025
77%23%<1%
3.90
Martha Davis
349W–162L career · 4 lines in 2025
33%67%<1%
3.56
3.5
Fra Angelica Farinas- Wright
70W–29L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Kamile Stadalninkaite
21W–11L career · no 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.