Teams

NITA E 40W40e Racquet Club LB (Geary)

2023 NITA1 ESL Adult 40 & Over · NITA ESL 40 & Over 4.0 Women

21 players · average NTRP 3.96 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
2022-12-09Won 30
W#1 DoublesCara Waddle / Priscilla Ewaldz vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesTory Jarvis / Heather Vishnubhakat vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesChristina Greeley / Rochelle Meng vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#1 DoublesHeidi Nickel / Lisa Hans vs Michele Muchmore / Margaret Chung3-6, 6-7
W#1 SinglesDesiree Witte vs Jennifer Koo6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesAllison Goldberg / Julia Miller vs Angela Lukas / Ann Murtaugh6-1, 6-3
L#3 DoublesCara Waddle / Heather Vishnubhakat vs Wendy Leto / Colleen Stover6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-11-20vs NITA E 40W40b Rush Copley (Adams)Split 22
W#1 DoublesCara Waddle / Sheila Bondoc vs Kristy Sweigard / Colleen Chionis6-3, 6-3
W#1 SinglesHeidi Nickel vs Katherine Martin3-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDesiree Witte / Rochelle Meng vs Ginger Riessen / Laura Skuja6-2, 1-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesHeather Vishnubhakat / Tory Jarvis vs Soraya McTeague / Susan Johnson4-6, 5-4, 0-1
L#1 DoublesSheila Bondoc / Priscilla Ewaldz vs Kelly Good / Janet Wolf4-6, 3-6
W#1 SinglesDesiree Witte vs Jean Ma6-3, 5-3
L#2 DoublesSuzanne Carr / Rochelle Meng vs Marinne Leonard / Lisa Rowen4-6, 3-5
L#3 DoublesAnna Dau / Heather Vishnubhakat vs Cindy Bielik / Kristine Lonsway1-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesJudy Morgan / Bela Starkman vs Annette Hennessy / Julie Sujack4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#1 SinglesDesiree Witte vs Denise Huth7-5, 2-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAnneMarie Geary / Tory Jarvis vs Katerina Hickey / Shannon Ebner6-4, 2-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesChristina Greeley / Heather Vishnubhakat vs Karie Scrogin / Deborah Poe5-7, 4-2, 1-0
W#1 DoublesDesiree Witte / Cara Waddle vs Kimberly Ricchio / Raquel Karpinski6-3, 6-3
L#1 SinglesJessica Kray vs Laura Hansen2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesJohanna Raimond / Suzanne Carr vs Martha Lloyd / Laurie Gray6-4, 5-4
W#3 DoublesHeidi Nickel / Dayle Levine vs Roseann Solak / Hoda Elshakankery6-1, 6-4
L#1 DoublesJudy Morgan / Allison Goldberg vs Elizabeth Quigley / Dawn Baumann6-4, 3-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesHeidi Nickel vs Teodora Varcheva6-3, 2-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDayle Levine / Jessica Kray vs Yumi Ida / Jean Soh2-6, 4-5
W#3 DoublesAnna Dau / Bela Starkman vs Kate Newman / Maria Lobo-Corey6-3, 6-1
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Carr / Johanna Raimond vs Jessica Grizzell / Keli Redinger3-6, 6-1, 0-1
W#1 SinglesHeidi Nickel vs Jennifer Krysinski6-2, 5-4
W#2 DoublesCara Waddle / AnneMarie Geary vs Louise Burnison / Darci Trout7-6, 4-1
W#3 DoublesDayle Levine / Lisa Hans vs Anna MacAtangay / Ying Zhang6-3, 6-1
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 standings9 teams · NITA ESL 40 & Over 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA E 40W40b Rush Copley (Adams)7124822212
2NITA E 40W40e Racquet Club LB (Geary)71211128230
3NITA E 40W40f Score (Bianchi/Knutte)62191328229
4NITA E 40W40c Centre Court AC (Ricchio/Brambora)44171533242
5NITA E 40W40a TAM (Lobo-Corey/Varcheva)44161637286
6NITA E 40W40d Oak Brook TC (Lukas/Cushing)35181432273
7NITA E 40W40g Hinsdale RC (Scrogin/Hennessey)35141841276
8NITA E 40W40h Courts Plus (Barsotti)26131940296
9NITA E 40W40i Five Star (Yaeger/Young)0823061373

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 3.72 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.

4.02
Anna Dau
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.98
Desiree Witte
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.94
Cara Waddle
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.92
Allison Goldberg
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.83
Bela Starkman
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.80
Johanna Raimond
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.75
Sheila Bondoc
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
AnneMarie Geary
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
Dayle Levine
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.70
Priscilla Ewaldz
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.69
Heidi Nickel
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.61
Rochelle Meng
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.58
Heather Vishnubhakat
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.49
Suzanne Carr
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.39
Christina Greeley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.34
Lisa Hans
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Jessica Kray
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Judy Morgan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Julie Steinberg
published
Sue Lehrer
published
Tory Jarvis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · 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.

Priscilla Ewaldz + Cara Waddle5173% games+16.2% vs expected
Anna Dau + Bela Starkman4357% games+12.4% vs expected
Dayle Levine + Heidi Nickel10263% games+11.5% vs expected
Desiree Witte + Anna Dau5257% games+10.7% vs expected
Heather Vishnubhakat + Rochelle Meng6460% games+7.3% vs expected
Bela Starkman + Rochelle Meng8458% games+7.3% vs expected
Sheila Bondoc + Desiree Witte23961% games+6.0% vs expected
Priscilla Ewaldz + Sheila Bondoc4354% games+5.6% 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
Anna Dau
206W–99L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%44%56%
4.02
4
Desiree Witte
258W–188L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%55%45%
3.98
4
Cara Waddle
162W–117L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%68%32%
3.94
4
Allison Goldberg
145W–90L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%74%26%
3.92
4
Bela Starkman
183W–164L career · 2 lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.83
4
Johanna Raimond
103W–71L career · 2 lines in 2023
1%93%6%
3.80
4
Sheila Bondoc
117W–62L career · 2 lines in 2023
3%95%3%
3.75
4
AnneMarie Geary
55W–43L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Dayle Levine
22W–10L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Priscilla Ewaldz
145W–184L career · 4 lines in 2023
6%93%1%
3.70
4
Heidi Nickel
88W–80L career · 5 lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Rochelle Meng
184W–198L career · 3 lines in 2023
20%80%<1%
3.61
4
Heather Vishnubhakat
130W–98L career · 5 lines in 2023
27%73%<1%
3.58
Suzanne Carr
45W–32L career · 3 lines in 2023
52%48%<1%
3.49
3.5
Christina Greeley
226W–208L career · 1 line in 2023
<1%79%21%
3.39
Lisa Hans
71W–103L career · 2 lines in 2023
88%12%<1%
3.34
Jessica Kray
19W–17L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Judy Morgan
18W–7L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Julie Steinberg
87W–36L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Sue Lehrer
84W–23L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Tory Jarvis
27W–31L career · 2 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.