Teams

Q LTC:Hit and Run:Maher/Willard

2022 WMA Tri-Level (Fall 2022) · 3.5 Women 1

5 players · average NTRP 3.83 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
2022-12-07vs ETC:MacCollWon 10
W#1 DoublesAna Gremli / Karen Bradway vs Carol MacColl / Susan Anderson6-4, 4-5, 1-0
2022-11-27vs ETC:Booty Slice:CoffeyWon 10
W#1 DoublesAna Gremli / Jessica Viviano vs Andrea Lewis / Emily Corriveau6-4, 3-0
2022-11-12vs LTC:Stauber/HartryWon 10
W#1 DoublesAmy Willard / Ana Gremli vs Valerie Stauber / Laurie Philbin7-6, 1-3, 1-0
2022-11-09vs LTC:BeaulieuWon 10
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Maher / Amy Willard vs Marie Sattler / Noreen Little6-1, 6-3
2022-11-01vs LTC:PaulWon 10
W#1 DoublesAmy Willard / Ana Gremli vs Becky Ayers / Dawn Fleury6-2, 6-1
2022-10-09vs BWAC:AndrettaWon 10
W#1 DoublesAna Gremli / Karen Bradway vs Laurie Andretta / Linda Babich6-3, 6-4
2022-10-05vs LTC:Volley Girls:BeaudoinWon 10
W#1 DoublesAmy Willard / Jessica Viviano vs Linda Batchelor / Barbara Beaudoin6-0, 6-3
2022-10-03vs LTC:Queens of the Court:DesrochesWon 10
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Maher / Amy Willard vs Noreen Desroches / Patricia Sullivan6-3, 6-2
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 · 3.5 Women 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Q LTC:Hit and Run:Maher/Willard8080244
2ETC:MacColl5252552
3LTC:Paul4343756
4LTC:Stauber/Hartry44441071
5LTC:Beaulieu44441071
6BWAC:Andretta3434859
7LTC:Queens of the Court:Desroches26261384
8ETC:Booty Slice:Coffey1313740
9LTC:Volley Girls:Beaudoin16161376

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 3.41 estimated across 3 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.

3.63
Ana Gremli
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.42
Amy Willard
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.16
Elizabeth Maher
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Jessica Viviano
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Karen Bradway
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.

Ana Gremli + Elizabeth Maher5354% games+9.5% vs expected
Amy Willard + Karen Bradway8752% games+5.7% vs expected
Ana Gremli + Amy Willard131250% games+4.2% vs expected
Amy Willard + Elizabeth Maher8550% games+1.9% vs expected
Elizabeth Maher + Karen Bradway3547% games−7.1% vs expected
Ana Gremli + Karen Bradway303 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.

4
Ana Gremli
60W–45L career · 5 lines in 2022
15%84%<1%
3.63
4
Amy Willard
104W–94L career · 5 lines in 2022
73%27%<1%
3.42
3.5
Elizabeth Maher
122W–105L career · 2 lines in 2022
10%89%<1%
3.16
Jessica Viviano
17W–27L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Karen Bradway
62W–107L career · 2 lines in 2022
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.