Teams

OD 3.5W CSC Goldberg

2025 NEOTA One-Doubles Summer · NEOTA A18&O 3.5 Women

5 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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 →
Schedule7 played
2025-08-02vs OD 3.5W MV4 ZhangWon 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Gidlow / Catey Peters vs Gwen Anderson / Patti Baucco6-2, 6-4
2025-07-30vs OD 3.5W BR MorrowWon 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Gidlow / Stacy Goldberg vs Francie Morrow / Traci Tsai6-2, 6-0
2025-07-19vs OD 3.5W MV1 BradyWon 10
W#1 DoublesStacy Goldberg / Catey Peters vs Liza Brady / Maggie Brady6-4, 6-4
2025-07-12vs OD 3.5W MM BramhallLost 01
L#1 DoublesErin Ryan / Emily Geier vs Celia Reid / Ashley Frazier4-6, 2-6
2025-06-28vs OD 3.5W BCC LurieWon 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Gidlow / Erin Ryan vs Lauren Roth / Caryn Friedman6-1, 6-0
2025-06-20vs OD 3.5W MV4 ZhangWon 10
W#1 DoublesKerri Dray / Jennifer Gidlow vs Christine Olenik / Gwen Anderson6-2, 6-1
2025-06-14vs OD 3.5W BR MorrowWon 10
W#1 DoublesKerri Dray / Erin Ryan vs Traci Tsai / Sara Timken7-6, 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 standings for NEOTA A18&O 3.5 Women 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 3.12 estimated across 5 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.

3.26
Catey Peters
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.23
Jennifer Gidlow
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.15
Kerri Dray
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.12
Stacy Goldberg
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.83
Emily Geier
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.

Jennifer Gidlow + Stacy Goldberg11165% games+13.2% vs expected
Kerri Dray + Jennifer Gidlow13459% games+7.6% vs expected
Kerri Dray + Stacy Goldberg4162% games+5.7% vs expected
Kerri Dray + Emily Geier12360% games+3.5% vs expected
Emily Geier + Stacy Goldberg5157% games+0.2% vs expected
Emily Geier + Jennifer Gidlow8552% games−2.1% vs expected
Catey Peters + Stacy Goldberg5249% games−2.6% vs expected
Emily Geier + Catey Peters4945% games−3.4% 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.

3.5
Catey Peters
52W–29L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.26
Jennifer Gidlow
71W–40L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
3.23
Kerri Dray
62W–34L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
3.15
Stacy Goldberg
96W–43L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
3.12
Emily Geier
76W–60L career · 1 line in 2025
0%1%99%
2.83

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.