Teams

F 3.5S/7.0D PW Mikolich

2023 NEOTA Fusion · NEOTA 3.5S

19 players · average NTRP 3.57 / NORTHEASTERN OHIO

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 →

Flight standings for NEOTA 3.5S 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 3.34 estimated across 14 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.

3.83
David Rickard
published 4
3.69
Debora Ksenich
published 4
3.67
Jim Mikolich
published
3.53
Nick Karas
published
3.48
Nicole Mikolich
published
3.46
Sara Verespej
published
3.31
Amanda de Leon
published 3.5
3.31
Julie Morrow
published
Chris Hensley
published 3.5
H Michael Wiant
published 3.5
3.22
Aiden N Stasek
published 3.5
3.15
Rachel van Meter
published
3.12
Sherry Rohweder
published
3.10
Jeffrey Barlow
published
2.98
Patrick Brogan
published
2.85
Diane Blesi
published 3
Lacey Hood
published
Megan Kelly
published
Stuart Scott
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.

Nick Karas + David Rickard12264% games+11.3% vs expected
Nicole Mikolich + Debora Ksenich10560% games+7.4% vs expected
Diane Blesi + Rachel van Meter4260% games+6.3% vs expected
Nicole Mikolich + Sara Verespej14561% games+6.2% vs expected
Sherry Rohweder + Julie Morrow271952% games−0.8% vs expected
Jim Mikolich + Stuart Scott8060% games−3.7% vs expected
Megan Kelly + Debora Ksenich2442% games−7.0% vs expected
Amanda de Leon + Rachel van Meter1550% 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.

4
David Rickard
117W–55L career · no lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.83
4
Debora Ksenich
124W–108L career · no lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.69
Jim Mikolich
81W–33L career · no lines in 2023
10%90%1%
3.67
Nick Karas
62W–29L career · no lines in 2023
<1%41%59%
3.53
Nicole Mikolich
108W–87L career · no lines in 2023
57%43%<1%
3.48
Sara Verespej
97W–52L career · no lines in 2023
63%37%<1%
3.46
3.5
Amanda de Leon
79W–72L career · no lines in 2023
1%92%8%
3.31
Julie Morrow
80W–56L career · no lines in 2023
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Chris Hensley
25W–43L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
3.5
H Michael Wiant
21W–22L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
3.5
Aiden N Stasek
23W–20L career · no lines in 2023
4%94%2%
3.22
Rachel van Meter
102W–61L career · no lines in 2023
13%87%<1%
3.15
Sherry Rohweder
71W–63L career · no lines in 2023
18%82%<1%
3.12
Jeffrey Barlow
22W–16L career · no lines in 2023
21%79%<1%
3.10
Patrick Brogan
15W–20L career · no lines in 2023
55%45%<1%
2.98
3
Diane Blesi
185W–128L career · no lines in 2023
<1%87%13%
2.85
Lacey Hood
18W–26L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Megan Kelly
36W–18L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Stuart Scott
36W–20L career · no 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.