Teams

MIT:Saudade

2021 VT Tri-Level Women · 4.0 Women

5 players · average NTRP 3.75 / VERMONT

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2021-11-21vs VSF:SloaneWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Lueders / Mary Saudade vs Mary Cohen / Carolyn Sloane6-3, 6-2
2021-11-20vs ESB:Net Chix:CookLost 01
L#1 DoublesHeather Potter / Karen Lueders vs Lesli Nichols / Tracey Barth4-6, 1-6
2021-11-14vs VSF:SloaneLost 01
L#1 DoublesMary Saudade / Sandra Nolte vs Carolyn Sloane / Mary Cohen6-7, 6-1, 0-1
2021-11-13vs ESB:Net Chix:CookLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaren Lueders / Heather Potter vs Tracey Barth / Beth Cook3-6, 6-7
2021-10-30vs ESB:Miss Hits:StrausserWon 10
W#1 DoublesSandra Nolte / Nancy Spears vs Aimee Babbott / Carol Bouyea6-4, 6-4
2021-10-23vs ESB:Miss Hits:StrausserWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Lueders / Nancy Spears vs Lisa Strausser / Carol Bouyea6-1, 6-2
2021-10-09vs ESB:One Love:VanKleeckWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Lueders / Nancy Spears vs Christine Campbell / Barbara Swan7-6, 6-3
2021-10-03vs ESB:One Love:VanKleeckLost 01
L#1 DoublesMary Saudade / Heather Potter vs Christine Campbell / Lynda Vankleeck2-6, 4-6
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 standings5 teams · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1ESB:Net Chix:Cook7171463
2ESB:Miss Hits:Strausser4444870
3MIT:Saudade4444871
4ESB:One Love:VanKleeck35351075
5VSF:Sloane26261497

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 3.47 estimated across 4 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.

3.68
Sandra Nolte
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.50
Nancy Spears
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.44
Mary Saudade
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.27
Heather Potter
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Karen Lueders
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Karen Lueders + Mary Saudade3946% games−2.3% vs expected
Nancy Spears + Mary Saudade1838% games−11.6% vs expected
Heather Potter + Mary Saudade3838% games−15.9% vs expected
Heather Potter + Nancy Spears4253% gamesnot enough data
Sandra Nolte + Nancy Spears2346% gamesnot enough data
Karen Lueders + Nancy Spears314 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
Sandra Nolte
68W–59L career · 2 lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.68
Nancy Spears
45W–61L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%50%50%
3.50
Mary Saudade
20W–43L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%67%33%
3.44
3.5
Heather Potter
20W–53L career · 3 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.27
Karen Lueders
38W–68L career · 5 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.