Teams

WI Combo 7.5W GML Western Racquet Wollersheim

2025 WI Combo · WI Combo 7.5 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.70 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
L#1 DoublesKari Jensen / Kay Wolff vs Diane Harmening / Lee Heinrich3-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesLisa Wilson / Rebecca Bradley vs Sarah Langerman / Rebekka Schneider1-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJulie Gundersen / Katie Bray vs Danica Olson / Lisa Ellegard2-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#1 DoublesRebecca Bradley / Elizabeth Jackson vs Susan Lutz / Kathleen Dubiel7-6, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJulie Gundersen / Rena Ragonese vs Joyce Coury / Karen Lucey1-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKari Jensen / Katie Bray vs Tina Kadrich / Kristen Lambrecht6-3, 6-7, 1-0
L#1 DoublesPeggy Munnagle / Betsy Williamson vs Kristyn Klind / Andrea Rowe6-4, 1-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Jackson / Kay Wolff vs Katie Kowieski / LIsa Turkow7-6, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJulie Gundersen / Rena Ragonese vs Karen Moskow / Carol Zembinski2-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#1 DoublesPeggy Munnagle / Katie Bray vs Kaitlin Wille / Kristin Marlier6-7, 3-6
L#2 DoublesKristin Ferge / Rena Ragonese vs Mary Murtos / Megan Hambrook6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesRebecca Bradley / Betsy Williamson vs Patricia Wille / Mary Whitfield1-6, 1-6
L#1 DoublesLisa Wilson / Therese Stockhausen vs Charlotte Toboyek / Christy Janikowski2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Jackson / Kay Wolff vs Margaret Hayes / Jennifer Picard6-2, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesKari Jensen / Betsy Williamson vs Michelle Webster / Lisa Kopfer2-6, 2-6
2025-08-20vs WI Combo 7.5W GML Lake Park CapatiSplit 11
L#1 DoublesKristin Ferge / Rebecca Bradley vs Amber Wichowsky / Emily Mcelhaney3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesPeggy Munnagle / Therese Stockhausen vs Dina Davis / Jaclyn Sturman6-3, 6-3
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 · WI Combo 7.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Combo 7.5W GML Kettle Moraine HS Toboyek601808114
2WI Combo 7.5W GML Wirth Park Harmelink5112615160
3WI Combo 7.5W GML Wirth Park Moskow3381025173
4WI Combo 7.5W GML River Glen Elite Langerman2471125176
5WI Combo 7.5W GML Lowell Park Larkin2461226170
6WI Combo 7.5W GML Western Racquet Wollersheim2471128191
7WI Combo 7.5W GML Lake Park Capati1551328181

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 3.43 estimated across 10 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.

3.79
Peggy Munnagle
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.78
Lisa Wilson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.77
Kari Jensen
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.73
Kristin Ferge
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.36
Katie Bray
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.33
Kay Wolff
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.23
Betsy Williamson
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.22
Therese Stockhausen
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.11
Rena Ragonese
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.02
Jodi Keller
published
Elizabeth Jackson
published
Julie Gundersen
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Rebecca Bradley
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Tricia Wollersheim
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.

Kristin Ferge + Peggy Munnagle131054% games+1.5% vs expected
Kristin Ferge + Rena Ragonese123 matchesnot enough data
Therese Stockhausen + Lisa Wilson123 matchesnot enough data
Therese Stockhausen + Kari Jensen123 matchesnot enough data
Kari Jensen + Betsy Williamson033 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
Peggy Munnagle
43W–37L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
3.79
Lisa Wilson
4W–21L career · 2 lines in 2025
94%6%<1%
3.78
Kari Jensen
15W–20L career · 3 lines in 2025
95%5%<1%
3.77
4
Kristin Ferge
29W–22L career · 2 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.73
Katie Bray
5W–8L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%83%16%
3.36
Kay Wolff
11W–8L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Betsy Williamson
3W–15L career · 3 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.23
3.5
Therese Stockhausen
17W–21L career · 2 lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Rena Ragonese
12W–19L career · 3 lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
3.11
Jodi Keller
10W–11L career · no lines in 2025
<1%43%57%
3.02
Elizabeth Jackson
0W–3L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Julie Gundersen
11W–7L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Rebecca Bradley
7W–25L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tricia Wollersheim
6W–13L 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.