Teams

WI Adult 18&O 3.5 W GML Nicolet Davis

2022 WI Adult 18 & Over · WI Adult 18 & Over 3.5 (Eve) Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.36 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
W#1 DoublesJoy Cutts / Ellen Kelderman vs Pam Taugher / Chris Tiahnybik6-2, 6-0
W#2 DoublesDina Davis / Victoria Underwood vs Julia Stacey / Andrea Bomwell6-7, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesChristie Ortwein / Michelle Thren vs Jill Federspill / Penny Menster2-6, 0-6
W#1 DoublesEllen Kelderman / Joy Cutts vs Christine Frank / Candace Walz6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesVictoria Underwood / Nina Capati vs Sharon Buell / Wendy Fischer7-6, 1-6, 1-0
L#2 SinglesConnie Ward vs Barbara Meyers2-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#3 DoublesMichelle Thren / Cana Comer vs Angela Johnson / Eileen Pfeifer6-7, 6-3, 1-0
W#1 DoublesJoy Cutts / Ellen Kelderman vs Joyce Koker / Margret Oolders4-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDina Davis / Victoria Underwood vs Theresa Leopold / Karen Lucey1-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesNina Capati vs Coryann St Marie-Carls1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesLauren Hansen / Michelle Thren vs Elizabeth Anderson / Jenny Anderson1-6, 5-7
L#1 DoublesDina Davis / Victoria Underwood vs Jennifer Mortonson / Cassie Raether3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#1 SinglesConnie Ward vs Kaitlyn Huebner0-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesEllen Kelderman / Joy Cutts vs Sandy Ortega / Patrice Michaels6-2, 6-0
L#2 SinglesCana Comer vs Sarah Evans1-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesLauren Hansen / Christie Ortwein vs Christina Rush / Lena Vinz6-3, 6-2
L#1 DoublesVictoria Underwood / Dina Davis vs Ann Pierson / Richelle Naze4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesNina Capati / Ellen Kelderman vs Jill Leahy / Deborah Pranke2-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesChristie Ortwein vs Julia Stacey4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesMichelle Thren / Cana Comer vs Jody Kopetsky / Jae Myers0-6, 2-6
W#1 DoublesDina Davis / Ellen Kelderman vs Andrea Rowe / Kathie Chvojicek6-4, 6-2
L#1 SinglesNina Capati vs Beth Grzesiak1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesCana Comer / Joy Cutts vs Jean Muench / Pam Lahmann4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesMichelle Thren / Connie Ward vs Natalie McCann / Arlene Adams0-6, 1-6
L#1 DoublesVictoria Underwood / Nina Capati vs LIsa Turkow / Mary Smith3-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesJoy Cutts vs Wei Speagle0-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesLauren Hansen / Cana Comer vs Karen Moskow / Nicole Penegor1-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesMichelle Thren vs Margaret Krei1-6, 0-6
L#1 DoublesDina Davis / Ellen Kelderman vs Barbara Meyers / Jodi Lloveras3-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesJoy Cutts vs Sally Haldorson4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesNina Capati / Victoria Underwood vs Kelly Keane / Robyn Wilgreen6-4, 6-4
L#2 SinglesConnie Ward vs Christine Frank3-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesLauren Hansen / Christie Ortwein vs Angela Johnson / Eileen Pfeifer6-4, 6-1
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 standings21 teams · WI Adult 18 & Over 3.5 (Eve) Women
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 3.11 estimated across 8 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.

3.44
Nina Capati
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.44
Ellen Kelderman
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.25
Dina Davis
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.24
Cana Comer
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.16
Victoria Underwood
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published
3.11
Christie Ortwein
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3.5
2.66
Michelle Thren
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #2 Singles 17% · published 3
2.54
Connie Ward
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
Joy Cutts
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 29% · 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.

Ellen Kelderman + Joy Cutts8161% games+15.0% vs expected
Dina Davis + Cana Comer10356% games+9.7% vs expected
Nina Capati + Ellen Kelderman5652% games+5.5% vs expected
Ellen Kelderman + Cana Comer4353% games+3.5% vs expected
Ellen Kelderman + Victoria Underwood7953% games+1.3% vs expected
Dina Davis + Victoria Underwood2544% games−7.5% vs expected
Connie Ward + Michelle Thren21729% games−15.0% vs expected
Michelle Thren + Christie Ortwein0613% games−20.9% 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.

3.5
Nina Capati
54W–49L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%67%33%
3.44
3.5
Ellen Kelderman
58W–56L career · 7 lines in 2022
<1%67%32%
3.44
3.5
Dina Davis
30W–29L career · 6 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Cana Comer
41W–54L career · 5 lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.24
Victoria Underwood
22W–28L career · 7 lines in 2022
11%88%<1%
3.16
3.5
Christie Ortwein
8W–19L career · 4 lines in 2022
19%80%<1%
3.11
3
Michelle Thren
11W–61L career · 6 lines in 2022
10%89%<1%
2.66
3
Connie Ward
7W–41L career · 4 lines in 2022
39%61%<1%
2.54
Joy Cutts
19W–15L career · 7 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.