Teams

NJD/Favia

Adult 40 & Over Spring · 4.5 Women Central

17 players · average NTRP 4.50 / NEW JERSEY

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-06-19vs RyghWon 20
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Favia / Michele Kiszely vs Maritza Dominguez / Cherie Rygh6-4, 3-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKei Imanishi / Kelly Meyers vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2025-06-16vs RyghWon 30
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Favia / Kristen Bocina vs Alice Napolitano / Jennifer Mellett6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesMelinda Lee / Kristina Alling vs Maritza Dominguez / Cherie Rygh7-6, 3-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesRebecca Bellingham / Melissa Hammer vs Liane van Etten / Antoinette Welsh6-3, 6-2
2025-06-04vs RyghSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMelissa Hammer / Jill Olman vs Yoonhee Kang / Michelle Kang1-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesSuzanne Favia / Angelina Frankovic vs Joanna Goldin / Martha Land6-2, 6-4
2025-05-28vs RyghWon 30
W#1 DoublesKaren Wells / Sladja Carton vs Joanna Goldin / Katherine Carey6-2, 6-1
W#1 SinglesKei Imanishi vs Anne Kelly6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMelinda Lee / Kristina Alling vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2025-05-21vs RyghWon 40
W#1 DoublesKaren Wells / Jill Olman vs Maritza Dominguez / Cherie Rygh6-1, 6-1
W#1 SinglesKei Imanishi vs Katherine Parker6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMelissa Hammer / Cecilia Tammling vs Joanna Goldin / Jennifer Park6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesSuzanne Favia / Sarah McDevitt vs Liane van Etten / Antoinette Welsh6-2, 6-1
2025-05-14vs RyghWon 10
W#1 DoublesJill Olman / Karen Wells vs Anne Kelly / Alice Napolitano6-2, 6-2
2025-05-07vs RyghWon 10
W#2 DoublesSladja Carton / Suzanne Favia vs Maritza Dominguez / Cherie Rygh6-2, 3-6, 1-0
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 standings2 teams · 4.5 Women Central
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NJD/Favia072715132
2Rygh0712754321

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 4.26 estimated across 16 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.

4.58
Karen Wells
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.48
Jill Olman
published
4.37
Kei Imanishi
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.37
Cecilia Tammling
published 4.5
4.31
Kallie Speller
published
4.30
Liz Mills
published
4.27
Michele Kiszely
published
4.26
Kristen Bocina
published
4.20
Kristina Alling
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.20
Angelina Frankovic
published 4.5
4.17
Kelly Meyers
published
4.16
Sarah McDevitt
published
4.16
Melinda Lee
published
4.15
Sladja Carton
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.14
Melissa Hammer
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
4.09
Suzanne Favia
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 4.5
Rebecca Bellingham
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.

Liz Mills + Sarah McDevitt34667% games+13.0% vs expected
Melissa Hammer + Cecilia Tammling4358% games+3.1% vs expected
Kristina Alling + Melinda Lee25560% games+3.1% vs expected
Michele Kiszely + Kelly Meyers4359% games+2.6% vs expected
Michele Kiszely + Suzanne Favia4352% games+1.9% vs expected
Suzanne Favia + Kelly Meyers3353% games+1.4% vs expected
Suzanne Favia + Sladja Carton151451% games+0.1% vs expected
Angelina Frankovic + Suzanne Favia11457% games−2.3% 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.

4.5
Karen Wells
39W–23L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%28%72%
4.58
Jill Olman
27W–28L career · no lines in 2025
<1%55%45%
4.48
4.5
Kei Imanishi
88W–76L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%81%18%
4.37
4.5
Cecilia Tammling
32W–9L career · no lines in 2025
<1%82%18%
4.37
Kallie Speller
31W–21L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%9%
4.31
Liz Mills
100W–16L career · no lines in 2025
2%91%7%
4.30
Michele Kiszely
90W–47L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
4.27
Kristen Bocina
57W–22L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%4%
4.26
4.5
Kristina Alling
161W–73L career · 2 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
4.20
4.5
Angelina Frankovic
33W–23L career · no lines in 2025
8%91%2%
4.20
Kelly Meyers
30W–12L career · no lines in 2025
12%87%1%
4.17
Sarah McDevitt
84W–15L career · no lines in 2025
12%87%1%
4.16
Melinda Lee
102W–43L career · no lines in 2025
13%86%1%
4.16
4.5
Sladja Carton
85W–41L career · 2 lines in 2025
15%85%1%
4.15
Melissa Hammer
53W–45L career · 3 lines in 2025
16%84%1%
4.14
4.5
Suzanne Favia
198W–131L career · 5 lines in 2025
26%73%<1%
4.09
Rebecca Bellingham
6W–2L career · no lines in 2025
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.