Teams

NITA S 50W18b Wilmette-Lee

2025 NITA3 Summer Adult 18 & Over · NITA Summer Adult 18 & Over 5.0 Women

8 players · average NTRP 4.83 / 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 →
Schedule3 played
L#1 DoublesMarialin Lomongo / Whitney Martin vs Ivonne Andrade-Ovalle / Alice Pacaut1-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesMary Therese Lee vs Sarah Monteagudo2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesBrittany Ballog / Ashley Podraza vs Tomomi Nagao / Ayano Nakamura6-1, 6-2
L#1 DoublesMary Kate Lee / Mary Therese Lee vs Alice Pacaut / Annemarie Emme2-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesIrina Dobin vs Jelena Vidovic2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesWhitney Martin / Megan Nguyen vs Polina Chala / Aleksandra Sredojevic4-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesMary Kate Lee / Irina Dobin vs Ivonne Andrade-Ovalle / Tomomi Nagao5-7, 2-6
L#1 SinglesMegan Nguyen vs Aleksandra Sredojevic3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesBrittany Ballog / Ashley Podraza vs Criszelle Elise Castro / Sarah Monteagudo7-6, 4-6, 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 standings2 teams · NITA Summer Adult 18 & Over 5.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA S 50W18a Wilmette-Wright/Nakamura3072456
2NITA S 50W18b Wilmette-Lee032715100

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 4.37 estimated across 6 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.

4.67
Brittany Ballog
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.58
Irina Dobin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 5
4.32
Megan Nguyen
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.32
Marialin Lomongo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.17
Whitney Martin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.17
Mary Therese Lee
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Ashley Podraza
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Mary Kate Lee
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.

Marialin Lomongo + Mary Therese Lee4254% games−15.1% vs expected
Marialin Lomongo + Whitney Martin134 matchesnot enough data
Mary Therese Lee + Whitney Martin213 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.

5
Brittany Ballog
47W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
no projection at this level
4.67
5
Irina Dobin
94W–47L career · 2 lines in 2025
no projection at this level
4.58
Megan Nguyen
100W–40L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%1%99%
4.32
4.5
Marialin Lomongo
322W–137L career · 1 line in 2025
1%89%10%
4.32
Whitney Martin
40W–27L career · 2 lines in 2025
no projection at this level
4.17
Mary Therese Lee
183W–110L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%12%88%
4.17
Ashley Podraza
11W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary Kate Lee
3W–4L career · 2 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.