Teams

CDTA S(W) TriWLow 6Northbrook Lund Tue 7 $26

CDTA 1Summer Tri Level (WN · WE)

19 players · average NTRP 3.66 / 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 →
Schedule3 played
L#2 DoublesCarol Swanson / Megan Crisham vs Suzanne Losasso / Jill Buckley3-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesCheryl Ingram / Lesley Bantle vs Lisa Modrich / Christine Pizza6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesVicki Groo / Lelia Lanuza vs Cindy Mulligan / Rebecca List6-3, 7-6
L#3 DoublesVicki Groo / Jane Peller vs Jacqueline Lakely / Stacey Watson3-6, 3-5
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 standings7 teams · WE)
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA S(W) TriWLow 5Glenview Baltazar Tue 7 $21511537106
2CDTA S(W) TriWLow 6Northbrook Lund Tue 7 $264212614133
3CDTA S(W) TriWLow 2Berens OUT Anderson Thur 6:30 $223310818146
4CDTA S(W) TriWLow 3Lake Bluff Pacaut Thur 6:30 $223381023161
5CDTA S(W) TriWLow 7MT Pal Byrne Mon 7 $263371123169
6CDTA S(W) TriWLow 1River Trails Fuller Sat 2 $262471124164
7CDTA S(W) TriWLow 4Barrington Martinez Wed 7 $241541431202

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 3.38 estimated across 19 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.

4.16
Jane Girard
published 4.5
3.80
Joanne Lund
published 4
3.73
Lesley Bantle
published 4
3.62
Bonny Tovar
published 4
3.58
Martha Lloyd
published 4
3.54
Janine Sheridan
published 4
3.42
Cheryl Ingram
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.39
Christina Greeley
published 3.5
3.39
Jessica Gross
published 3.5
3.35
Patricia Lozada
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.33
Agnieszka Fijol
published 3.5
3.31
Rosemary Swierk
published 3.5
3.24
Kelli Brinkman
published 3.5
3.22
Carol Swanson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.20
Vicki Groo
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.14
Megan Crisham
published 3.5
3.08
Lelia Lanuza
published 3
2.92
Nora Jewett
published 3
2.74
Jane Peller
usually #3 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.

Christina Greeley + Cheryl Ingram271157% games+8.4% vs expected
Martha Lloyd + Joanne Lund4257% games+3.7% vs expected
Patricia Lozada + Cheryl Ingram3456% games+2.9% vs expected
Kelli Brinkman + Nora Jewett8362% games+2.5% vs expected
Christina Greeley + Patricia Lozada10654% games+1.7% vs expected
Bonny Tovar + Agnieszka Fijol9950% games−1.8% vs expected
Megan Crisham + Carol Swanson193048% games−5.6% vs expected
Janine Sheridan + Joanne Lund4847% games−5.8% 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.

4.5
Jane Girard
112W–55L career · no lines in 2025
13%87%1%
4.16
4
Joanne Lund
172W–88L career · no lines in 2025
2%91%7%
3.80
4
Lesley Bantle
115W–39L career · no lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Bonny Tovar
55W–32L career · no lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.62
4
Martha Lloyd
201W–145L career · no lines in 2025
29%71%<1%
3.58
4
Janine Sheridan
65W–64L career · no lines in 2025
38%62%<1%
3.54
3.5
Cheryl Ingram
107W–67L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%72%28%
3.42
3.5
Christina Greeley
211W–196L career · no lines in 2025
<1%77%22%
3.39
3.5
Jessica Gross
74W–47L career · no lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
3.39
Patricia Lozada
152W–132L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%86%14%
3.35
3.5
Agnieszka Fijol
128W–115L career · no lines in 2025
1%87%12%
3.33
3.5
Rosemary Swierk
70W–29L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%8%
3.31
3.5
Kelli Brinkman
45W–18L career · no lines in 2025
4%93%3%
3.24
3.5
Carol Swanson
37W–30L career · 1 line in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
Vicki Groo
24W–28L career · 2 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.20
3.5
Megan Crisham
138W–161L career · no lines in 2025
16%83%<1%
3.14
3
Lelia Lanuza
32W–10L career · no lines in 2025
<1%28%72%
3.08
3
Nora Jewett
37W–21L career · no lines in 2025
<1%73%27%
2.92
Jane Peller
24W–63L career · 1 line in 2025
4%93%3%
2.74

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.