Teams

ETC:KMA:Burns

2023 WMA Tri-Level Spring (2023) · 3.0 Women 1

5 players · average NTRP / WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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 →
Schedule7 played
2023-06-22vs ETC:Play It Forward:KavanaghLost 01
L#1 DoublesLiz Bone / Moira Murphy vs Elaine Grocott / Alison Salka1-6, 1-6
2023-06-15vs LTC:Slice Girls:Roux/HaddockLost 01
L#1 DoublesMoira Murphy / Liz Bone vs Nancy Roux / Cindy Haddock5-7, 4-3, 0-1
2023-06-08vs ETC:Stranger Strings:Foster/MusickLost 01
L#1 DoublesLiz Bone / Judy D'Angelo vs Xia Lu / Huanran Musick0-6, 2-6
2023-06-03vs LTC:Jordan/TerrincaWon 10
W#1 DoublesKimberly Burns / Meralee Kratovil vs Linda Terrinca / Eileen Jordan6-4, 6-0
2023-06-01vs ETC:Comic Relief:Besse/DouvilleLost 01
L#1 DoublesJudy D'Angelo / Meralee Kratovil vs Melissa Besse / Susan Goldsmith3-6, 2-4
2023-05-27vs LTC:CroteauLost 01
L#1 DoublesKimberly Burns / Meralee Kratovil vs Nancy Kurty / Suzanne Streeter5-7, 4-3, 0-1
2023-05-20vs LTC:High Impact:Wickens/HunterLost 01
L#1 DoublesKimberly Burns / Judy D'Angelo vs Tina Kingston / Catherine Wickens3-6, 5-6
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 standings for 3.0 Women 1 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 2.71 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.

2.81
Meralee Kratovil
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.74
Kimberly Burns
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.70
Liz Bone
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.58
Moira Murphy
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Judy D'Angelo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Meralee Kratovil + Kimberly Burns181158% games+3.2% vs expected
Meralee Kratovil + Judy D'Angelo3448% games−4.7% vs expected
Moira Murphy + Kimberly Burns7946% games−6.7% vs expected
Moira Murphy + Judy D'Angelo5942% games−9.6% vs expected
Meralee Kratovil + Moira Murphy3357% gamesnot enough data
Moira Murphy + Liz Bone033 matchesnot enough data
Judy D'Angelo + Kimberly Burns213 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.

Meralee Kratovil
51W–28L career · 3 lines in 2023
1%92%7%
2.81
Kimberly Burns
55W–51L career · 3 lines in 2023
3%94%2%
2.74
Liz Bone
35W–35L career · 3 lines in 2023
6%93%1%
2.70
Moira Murphy
58W–67L career · 2 lines in 2023
27%73%<1%
2.58
Judy D'Angelo
28W–27L career · 3 lines in 2023
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.