Teams

GreyHawk - Curry

2021 Collier Mixed 40 & Over Fall · Mixed 40 8.0 Fall

6 players · average NTRP 3.83 / REGION_7

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2020-12-13vs Pelican Bay North - RuffoloLost 02
L#1 DoublesDan Curry / Dina Viteretti vs Jocelyn Badiu / Rick McGrath4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesScott Brown / Michelle Maggal vs Mary Miranda-Del Rossi / Neal Lewis6-0, 2-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMichelle Maggal / Scott Brown vs Tim Miller / Candice Lopez3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesDina Viteretti / Dan Curry vs Marina Eschoyez-Quiroga / Roger Paez4-6, 2-6
2020-12-05Lost 01
L#1 DoublesDina Viteretti / Dan Curry vs Troy Rush / Linda Smith6-4, 3-6, 0-1
2020-11-28vs Pelican Bay North - RuffoloSplit 11
L#1 DoublesJohn Reichel / Michelle Maggal vs Neal Lewis / Jocelyn Badiu4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesDan Curry / Dina Viteretti vs Rick McGrath / Mary Miranda-Del Rossi7-6, 6-4
2020-11-21vs Marco YMCA - WashakSplit 11
W#2 DoublesDina Viteretti / Dan Curry vs Sandra Steller / Robert Steller6-4, 6-4
L#3 DoublesMichelle Maggal / Charles Mills vs Linda Hayes / Carlos Baez2-6, 4-6
2020-11-14vs Marco YMCA - MastrogiacomoWon 20
W#1 DoublesJohn Reichel / Michelle Maggal vs Doug Egem / Ann Heinauer6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDan Curry / Dina Viteretti vs Ken Walter / Bernadette DiPino6-4, 7-5
W#1 DoublesJill Hulbert / Dan Curry vs Trisha Daoud / David Townsley6-1, 6-4
2020-10-31vs Naples Grande - L. LaveryLost 01
L#1 DoublesDan Curry / Jill Hulbert vs Barbara Dovin / Timothy Buelow1-6, 2-6
2020-10-24vs Pelican Marsh - BargerWon 20
W#1 DoublesDonna Curry / Dan Curry vs Sunny Barger / David Hoffberg6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMichelle Maggal / John Reichel vs Susan Lee / James Yoder6-4, 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 Mixed 40 8.0 Fall 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 3.63 estimated across 4 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.

4.07
Dan Curry
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.70
Donna Curry
published 4
3.41
Dina Viteretti
published 3.5
3.32
Michelle Maggal
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Linda Orlich
published
Valerie Miliotis
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.

Dan Curry + Donna Curry7557% 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
Dan Curry
111W–39L career · 9 lines in 2021
<1%30%70%
4.07
4
Donna Curry
10W–10L career · no lines in 2021
6%93%1%
3.70
3.5
Dina Viteretti
12W–14L career · no lines in 2021
<1%75%25%
3.41
Michelle Maggal
169W–159L career · 6 lines in 2021
1%91%8%
3.32
Linda Orlich
10W–14L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Valerie Miliotis
10W–6L career · no lines in 2021
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.