Teams

A40 3.5W MV2 Gustafson

2026 NEOTA Adult 40 & Over · NEOTA A40&O 3.5 Women

18 players · average NTRP 3.40 / NORTHEASTERN OHIO

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 →
Schedule2 played
2026-07-07vs A40 3.5W CC SchaeferWon 41
W#1 DoublesKathleen Aranavage / Patricia Mercuri vs Shelby Novick / Bridgette Palus6-3, 6-0
L#1 SinglesPatti Baucco vs Patti Naim4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesCheryl Kanetsky / Kara Geiger vs Eileen Linz / Julie Visconsi6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesKaren Cipriani / Diane Roberto vs Tisha Bell / Darcie Hansen7-6, 6-2
W#4 DoublesKate Bishop / Mary Wilburn vs Melissa Becker / Stephanie Kevany6-0, 7-6
2026-06-02vs A40 3.5W CC SchaeferWon 41
W#1 DoublesKathleen Aranavage / Patricia Mercuri vs Shelby Novick / Bridgette Palus6-3, 6-4
L#1 SinglesPatti Baucco vs Jessica Czekalinski2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesMichelle Scullin / Lisa Bockhoff vs Danielle Simpson / Susan Freund7-5, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKate Bishop / Jan Kolesar vs Darcie Hansen / Barbara Neilsen6-0, 6-4
W#4 DoublesElyse Gustafson / Diane Roberto vs Stephanie Kevany / Tisha Bell6-3, 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 standings for NEOTA A40&O 3.5 Women have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.20 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.

3.60
Erica Wigton
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.51
Karen Cipriani
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.39
Cheryl Kanetsky
usually #4 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.38
Lisa Bockhoff
usually #1 Singles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
3.37
Kara Geiger
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.36
Kathleen Aranavage
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #4 Doubles 33% · published
3.32
Mary Wilburn
usually #4 Doubles 100% · published
3.30
Patricia Mercuri
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.29
Jan Kolesar
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.25
Lynn Sands
published
3.23
Diane Roberto
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #4 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.02
Michelle Scullin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.99
Karen McLeod
published
2.93
Elyse Gustafson
usually #4 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.88
Patti Baucco
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.86
Christine Olenik
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.79
Susie Vitale
published
Kate Bishop
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.

Patricia Mercuri + Kathleen Aranavage15762% games+10.6% vs expected
Cheryl Kanetsky + Kathleen Aranavage6261% games+9.7% vs expected
Cheryl Kanetsky + Lynn Sands7261% games+9.1% vs expected
Kathleen Aranavage + Jan Kolesar11266% games+6.8% vs expected
Mary Wilburn + Cheryl Kanetsky7558% games+3.5% vs expected
Patricia Mercuri + Jan Kolesar16658% games+1.9% vs expected
Christine Olenik + Patti Baucco0541% games−0.9% vs expected
Elyse Gustafson + Cheryl Kanetsky3347% games−6.5% 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
Erica Wigton
45W–28L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%23%77%
3.60
Karen Cipriani
86W–70L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%46%54%
3.51
3.5
Cheryl Kanetsky
120W–79L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.39
Lisa Bockhoff
30W–45L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%83%17%
3.38
Kara Geiger
46W–39L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%84%15%
3.37
Kathleen Aranavage
147W–83L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%86%14%
3.36
Mary Wilburn
64W–62L career · 1 line in 2026
1%91%8%
3.32
Patricia Mercuri
171W–118L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%93%6%
3.30
Jan Kolesar
140W–68L career · 1 line in 2026
1%94%5%
3.29
Lynn Sands
51W–30L career · no lines in 2026
3%95%2%
3.25
3.5
Diane Roberto
49W–35L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.23
Michelle Scullin
43W–45L career · 1 line in 2026
42%58%<1%
3.02
Karen McLeod
54W–85L career · no lines in 2026
52%48%<1%
2.99
3.5
Elyse Gustafson
103W–128L career · 1 line in 2026
70%30%<1%
2.93
Patti Baucco
67W–56L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%83%17%
2.88
3
Christine Olenik
41W–59L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%86%14%
2.86
Susie Vitale
11W–17L career · no lines in 2026
1%94%5%
2.79
Kate Bishop
7W–12L career · no lines in 2026
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.