Teams

WI Tri-Level Delta W NCL Marshfield Wesolowski

2022 WI OTHER · WI Other Tri Level Delta Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.50 / WISCONSIN

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 →
Schedule4 played
L#1 DoublesHolly Reckner / Renee Wesolowski vs Karlyn Jakusz / Nichole Matowitz3-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesSandy Stargardt / Michele Newman vs Tara Cooper / Kristin Marquard6-7, 6-0, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSandra Egstad / Melinda Lindgren vs La Rue Davison / Suzanne DuBois7-5, 6-2
W#1 DoublesRenee Wesolowski / Holly Reckner vs Carolyn Blair / Lori Guilliams6-4, 2-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSandy Stargardt / Michele Newman vs Meghan Busa / Dorothea Ho4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesSandra Egstad / Melinda Lindgren vs Nikki Sommers / Meredith Congdon5-7, 0-6
W#1 DoublesRenee Wesolowski / Holly Reckner vs Carolyn Blair / Lori Guilliams6-3, 7-5
L#2 DoublesDonna Hansen / Sandy Stargardt vs Dorothea Ho / Meghan Busa6-4, 0-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesSandra Egstad / Jill Meilahn vs Meredith Congdon / Nikki Sommers3-6, 0-6
L#1 DoublesSandy Stargardt / Renee Wesolowski vs Karlyn Jakusz / Nichole Matowitz4-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMichele Newman / Donna Hansen vs Kristin Marquard / Tara Cooper1-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJill Meilahn / Sandra Egstad vs C H / Kelly Shippy4-6, 0-6
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 standings3 teams · WI Other Tri Level Delta Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Tri-Level Delta W NCL Stevens Point2 Guilliams317512104
2WI Tri-Level Delta W NCL Stevens Point1 Cooper227511106
3WI Tri-Level Delta W NCL Marshfield Wesolowski134818129

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 3.03 estimated across 1 rated player. 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.

3.03
Donna Hansen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Holly Reckner
published
Michele Newman
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Renee Wesolowski
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Sandra Egstad
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Sandy Stargardt
usually #2 Doubles 75%, 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.

Renee Wesolowski + Holly Reckner5551% games−1.5% vs expected
Donna Hansen + Michele Newman3640% games−5.4% vs expected
Donna Hansen + Sandy Stargardt2347% gamesnot 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.

3.5
Donna Hansen
17W–28L career · 2 lines in 2022
40%60%<1%
3.03
Holly Reckner
5W–5L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Michele Newman
13W–17L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Renee Wesolowski
18W–28L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sandra Egstad
11W–12L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sandy Stargardt
16W–15L 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.