Teams

MIT:Hopewell/Luksch

2024 VT Adult 40 & Over Women · 4.0 Adult 40 & Over - Women Flight 1

10 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VERMONT

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2024-05-25vs EE:The Intangibles:Demas/WeissSplit 22
W#1 DoublesKaren Lueders / Victoria Luksch vs Kathy Erickson / Ann Laramee6-0, 2-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesSarah Hopewell vs Jennifer Weiss6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesMary Saudade / Heather Potter vs Katherine Arthaud / Cynthia Sherburne2-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesJanis Bark / Nancy Spears vs Laura Williams / Kim McManus2-6, 1-6
2024-05-04vs ESB:NicholsSplit 22
L#1 DoublesVictoria Luksch / Janis Bark vs Lesli Nichols / Beth Cook1-6, 5-7
W#1 SinglesJill Dunn vs Alison Estey6-1, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKaren Lueders / Mary Saudade vs Jeanne Blackmore / Maura Wygmans3-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesNancy Spears / Sara Marshall vs Carol Bouyea / Caroline Murphy1-6, 6-3, 1-0
2024-04-28vs ESB:NicholsSplit 22
L#1 DoublesKaren Lueders / Mary Saudade vs Beth Cook / Michele Gilbert5-7, 5-6
L#1 SinglesSarah Hopewell vs Kanitha Burns1-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesJill Dunn / Heather Potter vs Caroline Murphy / Jeanne Blackmore6-7, 5-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCinny Lawrence / Victoria Luksch vs Aimee Babbott / Martha Small6-0, 6-3
2024-04-14vs EE:The Intangibles:Demas/WeissWon 40
W#1 DoublesMary Saudade / Karen Lueders vs Laura Williams / Laura Cawley4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#1 SinglesSarah Hopewell vs Jennifer Weiss6-2, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesVictoria Luksch / Cinny Lawrence vs Melissa Thomas / Laurel Clark1-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesHeather Potter / Sara Marshall vs Edye Graning / Liz Demas6-3, 6-1
2024-04-12vs EE:The Intangibles:Demas/WeissSplit 22
L#1 DoublesJanis Bark / Karen Lueders vs Kate Kenny / Jennifer Weiss2-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#1 SinglesSarah Hopewell vs Kim McManus7-6, 5-0
L#2 DoublesCinny Lawrence / Jill Dunn vs Jude Melen / Kathy Erickson3-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesNancy Spears / Sara Marshall vs Lynn Bursell / Edye Graning3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2024-04-07vs ESB:NicholsSplit 22
L#1 DoublesNancy Spears / Victoria Luksch vs Beth Cook / Lesli Nichols2-6, 5-7
W#1 SinglesJill Dunn vs Monika Granata3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMary Saudade / Karen Lueders vs Caroline Murphy / Jeanne Blackmore7-6, 6-1
L#3 DoublesCinny Lawrence / Janis Bark vs Carol Bouyea / Carrie Wulfman2-6, 4-6
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 standings3 teams · 4.0 Adult 40 & Over - Women Flight 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1ESB:Nichols0615918168
2MIT:Hopewell/Luksch06141029222
3EE:The Intangibles:Demas/Weiss0671737242

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 3.46 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.

3.93
Jill Dunn
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.69
Victoria Luksch
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.62
Sarah Hopewell
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.49
Nancy Spears
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.45
Mary Saudade
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.40
Heather Potter
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.21
Cinny Lawrence
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.89
Sara Marshall
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Janis Bark
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Karen Lueders
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Victoria Luksch + Sara Marshall4354% games+3.5% vs expected
Janis Bark + Nancy Spears6643% games+2.2% vs expected
Nancy Spears + Sara Marshall5449% games+1.3% vs expected
Karen Lueders + Mary Saudade3846% games−2.6% vs expected
Heather Potter + Mary Saudade3838% games−16.1% vs expected
Janis Bark + Sara Marshall2742% games−21.1% vs expected
Janis Bark + Heather Potter1938% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Spears + Mary Saudade1735% gamesnot 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.

Jill Dunn
36W–39L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%69%31%
3.93
Victoria Luksch
68W–46L career · 5 lines in 2024
8%90%1%
3.69
Sarah Hopewell
13W–11L career · 4 lines in 2024
20%80%<1%
3.62
Nancy Spears
44W–59L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%52%48%
3.49
Mary Saudade
20W–40L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%64%36%
3.45
Heather Potter
19W–52L career · 3 lines in 2024
76%24%<1%
3.40
3.5
Cinny Lawrence
15W–21L career · 4 lines in 2024
7%91%2%
3.21
Sara Marshall
40W–60L career · 3 lines in 2024
78%22%<1%
2.89
Janis Bark
42W–71L career · 4 lines in 2024
not enough data
Karen Lueders
38W–65L career · 6 lines in 2024
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.