Teams

NITA S 50TLWa Wilmette-Wright/Nakamura

2024 NITA3 Summerz Tri Level 18&O · NITA S Tri Level Women 4.0

18 players · average NTRP 4.45 / NORTHERN ILLINOIS

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 →
Schedule6 played
2024-08-02vs NITA S 50TLWb Tam-Ulbert/CalLost 02
L#1 DoublesAyano Nakamura / Marialin Lomongo vs Marija Jovicic / Marina Hermanny de Figueiredo1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesMartha Davis / Ashley Kaufman vs Claire Buehler / Bethany Lynch0-6, 0-6
2024-07-21vs NITA S 50TLWb Tam-Ulbert/CalWon 21
W#1 DoublesSarah Monteagudo / Tomomi Nagao vs Claire Buehler / Kaitlin Ulbert6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesAmanda Connell / Ayano Nakamura vs Shana Cal / Grace Hahn6-4, 6-1
L#3 DoublesJennifer Langtry / Soraya McTeague vs Emily Doyle / Ana Chang6-1, 3-6, 0-1
2024-07-13vs NITA S 50TLWb Tam-Ulbert/CalWon 20
W#1 DoublesMegan Nguyen / Tomomi Nagao vs Kaitlin Ulbert / Claire Buehler7-6, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAyano Nakamura / Heather Mixon vs Shana Cal / Grace Hahn6-2, 6-4
2024-07-08vs NITA S 50TLWb Tam-Ulbert/CalLost 12
W#1 DoublesMarialin Lomongo / Alice Pacaut vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#2 DoublesMary Therese Lee / Ayano Nakamura vs Bethany Lynch / Jena Lindstrom6-3, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMartha Davis / Ashley Kaufman vs Ana Chang / Susan Klumpner4-6, 3-6
2024-06-15vs NITA S 50TLWb Tam-Ulbert/CalWon 21
L#1 DoublesMegan Nguyen / Alice Pacaut vs Marina Hermanny de Figueiredo / Kaitlin Ulbert4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAmanda Connell / Ayano Nakamura vs Jena Lindstrom / Claire Buehler6-4, 6-4
W#3 DoublesKristine Jurczyk / Jennifer Langtry vs Ngozi Ezike / Colleen Chionis6-3, 7-6
2024-06-02vs NITA S 50TLWb Tam-Ulbert/CalSplit 11
W#1 DoublesSarah Monteagudo / Tomomi Nagao vs Kaitlin Ulbert / Marija Jovicic6-0, 6-4
L#2 DoublesMary Therese Lee / Heather Mixon vs Claire Buehler / Bethany Lynch6-2, 2-4, 0-1
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 NITA S Tri Level Women 4.0 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 4.22 estimated across 15 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.

4.98
Alice Pacaut
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.40
Sarah Monteagudo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.37
Ayano Nakamura
usually #1 Doubles 64%, also #2 Doubles 36% · published 4.5
4.33
Heather Mixon
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.32
Megan Nguyen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.32
Amanda Connell
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.32
Marialin Lomongo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.31
Tomomi Nagao
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.17
Grace Kuhrt
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4.5
4.17
Mary Therese Lee
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.14
Jennifer Langtry
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.08
Crystal Leighton
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.99
Soraya McTeague
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
3.88
Kristine Jurczyk
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
Ashley Kaufman
published 4
3.55
Martha Davis
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Selenay Heper
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.

Martha Davis + Crystal Leighton8075% games+21.1% vs expected
Megan Nguyen + Tomomi Nagao6263% games+20.6% vs expected
Martha Davis + Ayano Nakamura7059% games+15.8% vs expected
Heather Mixon + Mary Therese Lee7457% games+14.1% vs expected
Martha Davis + Ashley Kaufman7064% games+10.6% vs expected
Megan Nguyen + Alice Pacaut6363% games+9.0% vs expected
Amanda Connell + Ayano Nakamura14162% games+8.7% vs expected
Crystal Leighton + Grace Kuhrt24764% games+8.5% 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.

5
Alice Pacaut
143W–36L career · 2 lines in 2024
no projection at this level
4.98
Sarah Monteagudo
55W–24L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%<1%>99%
4.40
4.5
Ayano Nakamura
286W–110L career · 11 lines in 2024
<1%82%18%
4.37
Heather Mixon
49W–10L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%1%99%
4.33
Megan Nguyen
100W–40L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%1%99%
4.32
4.5
Amanda Connell
94W–42L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%89%10%
4.32
4.5
Marialin Lomongo
322W–137L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%89%10%
4.32
Tomomi Nagao
43W–16L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%1%99%
4.31
4.5
Grace Kuhrt
134W–66L career · 5 lines in 2024
11%88%1%
4.17
Mary Therese Lee
183W–110L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%12%88%
4.17
4.5
Jennifer Langtry
244W–109L career · 2 lines in 2024
16%84%1%
4.14
4
Crystal Leighton
308W–80L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%30%70%
4.08
4.5
Soraya McTeague
162W–103L career · 4 lines in 2024
54%46%<1%
3.99
4.5
Kristine Jurczyk
327W–126L career · 4 lines in 2024
81%19%<1%
3.88
4
Ashley Kaufman
43W–25L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Martha Davis
321W–153L career · 5 lines in 2024
35%65%<1%
3.55
Fra Angelica Farinas- Wright
62W–25L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Selenay Heper
18W–5L career · no 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.