Teams

CDTA W 40&OW4.0 9.Barrington Gray Sat 9 $24

CDTA Winter 40 & Over W · E

19 players · average NTRP 3.96 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
W#2 DoublesLaurie Gray / Diane McKillen vs Nora Errico / Meg Greenberg6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesLaurie Gray / Martha Lloyd vs Sally Washlow / Brenda Taitler3-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesMary Etherington / Laurie Gray vs Julie Weidner / Ling Arenson6-4, 6-5
L#2 DoublesCheryl Watkins / Kelly Valverde vs Joanne Lund / Patricia Nelson7-6, 2-3, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKelly Valverde / Shelley Szela vs Denise Schneider / Christina Greeley6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesGayle Dominicis / Kelly Valverde vs Kristen Coy / Susan Kalina6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLaurie Gray / Kathleen McLaughlin vs Monique Melnick / Iva Gregorova6-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesMary Etherington / Cheryl Watkins vs Kristy Sweigard / Katerina Hickey6-3, 2-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLori Saguto / Cheryl Watkins vs Marjorie Baltazar / Sarah Blankenbaker3-6, 7-5, 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 standings13 teams · E
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA W 40&OW4.0 12.Barrington Willis Sat 3 $2411036826301
2CDTA W 40&OW4.0 2.Nielsen Sheridan Sat 4 $2292311330312
3CDTA W 40&OW4.0 4.Tam Corey Sun 11 $2283261839324
4CDTA W 40&OW4.0 1.MT Bann Coy Sat 2 $2765261839329
5CDTA W 40&OW4.0 5.Hinsdale Cashman Sun 5 $2265232152374
6CDTA W 40&OW4.0 3.Tam Lund Sun 2 $2265222255394
7CDTA W 40&OW4.0 9.Barrington Gray Sat 9 $2456192557413
8CDTA W 40&OW4.0 6.Forest View Hayashida Sat 4 $2347192555374
9CDTA W 40&OW4.0 11.Nielsen Burnside Sat 4 $2238212354388
10CDTA W 40&OW4.0 8.River Trails Jasinski Sun 6 $2438162865448
11CDTA W 40&OW4.0 7.Oak Park Sujack Sat 4 $2538152965414
12CDTA W 40&OW4.0 10.Glenbrook Hans Sat 1 $2529103471458
13zDROPPED-CDTA W 40&OW4.0 13.River Trails Greenberg Sat 4 $26000000

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 3.61 estimated across 17 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.

3.94
Stacey Tomczak
published 4
3.86
Melissa Schopin
published 4
3.74
3.73
KAREN MAJERCZAK
published 4
3.67
Lori Saguto
published 4
3.67
Gayle Dominicis
published 4
3.66
Mary Etherington
published 4
3.65
Kelly Valverde
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.63
Laurie Gray
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.60
Cheryl Watkins
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.60
Shannon Pirron
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.58
Martha Lloyd
published 4
3.50
Shelley Szela
published 4
3.48
Diane McKillen
published 4
3.47
Laury Scheyer
published 4
3.46
3.21
Mimi Paffrath
published 3.5
Karen Light
published
Kathleen McLaughlin
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 MAJERCZAK + Shannon Pirron6261% games+11.6% vs expected
Martha Lloyd + Shannon Pirron8065% games+7.4% vs expected
Cheryl Watkins + Gayle Dominicis7853% games+5.3% vs expected
Karen Light + Shannon Pirron4354% games+5.2% vs expected
Mary Etherington + Gayle Dominicis14362% games+4.3% vs expected
Laury Scheyer + Diane McKillen4350% games+2.3% vs expected
Mary Etherington + Stacey Tomczak6259% games+2.1% vs expected
Mary Etherington + Laurie Gray13255% games+0.6% 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.

4
Stacey Tomczak
45W–25L career · no lines in 2025
<1%68%32%
3.94
4
Melissa Schopin
103W–40L career · no lines in 2025
<1%83%16%
3.86
4
BethAnn Fitzgerald
62W–48L career · no lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.74
4
KAREN MAJERCZAK
160W–108L career · no lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Lori Saguto
223W–119L career · no lines in 2025
11%88%1%
3.67
4
Gayle Dominicis
229W–135L career · no lines in 2025
12%88%1%
3.67
4
Mary Etherington
110W–66L career · no lines in 2025
13%86%1%
3.66
Kelly Valverde
18W–8L career · 3 lines in 2025
15%85%1%
3.65
Laurie Gray
148W–102L career · 4 lines in 2025
18%82%<1%
3.63
4
Cheryl Watkins
60W–53L career · 3 lines in 2025
24%76%<1%
3.60
Shannon Pirron
56W–29L career · 3 lines in 2025
25%75%<1%
3.60
4
Martha Lloyd
201W–145L career · no lines in 2025
29%71%<1%
3.58
4
Shelley Szela
29W–58L career · no lines in 2025
50%50%<1%
3.50
4
Diane McKillen
89W–54L career · no lines in 2025
56%44%<1%
3.48
4
Laury Scheyer
56W–44L career · type A · no lines in 2025
58%42%<1%
3.47
4
Stephanie Remelius
75W–73L career · no lines in 2025
60%40%<1%
3.46
3.5
Mimi Paffrath
76W–51L career · no lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.21
Karen Light
6W–4L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Kathleen McLaughlin
27W–16L 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.