Teams

CDTA S TriWMid 7.LifeLB(OUT) Kiernan Sat 9 $27

1Summer Tri-level WN · WE

10 players · average NTRP 4.00 / CHICAGO

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
W#1 DoublesColette Gramins / Cyndy Krietsch vs Marikko Orr / Hannah Soong6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesDiane Taranowski / Ann Park vs Illana Hodges / Melissa Ko2-6, 5-6
L#2 DoublesAnn Park / Diane Taranowski vs Hilary Fife / Jean Soh4-6, 3-4
2026-06-20Lost 01
L#2 DoublesAnn Park / Juliann Abderholden vs Laurie Knutte / Jill Odenbeck2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesAnn Park / Diane Taranowski vs Kelly Couris / Joanna White3-6, 6-5, 0-1
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 standings8 teams · WE
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA S TriWMid 8.Gnvw Baltazar Tue 7 $215113510120
2CDTA S TriWMid 6.STP Wright Sat 3 $225112614121
3CDTA S TriWMid 1.Score Knutte Sat 11 $205214716140
4CDTA S TriWMid 4.RCLB Ewaldz Sun 4 $224211718149
5CDTA S TriWMid 5.Nielsen Lund Sun 1 $22249920148
6CDTA S TriWMid 2.MTP Byrne Mon 7 $272461227199
7CDTA S TriWMid 3.Tam Landt Sun 1 $222571427211
8CDTA S TriWMid 7.LifeLB(OUT) Kiernan Sat 9 $270631530183

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 3.56 estimated across 8 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.

4.33
Colette Gramins
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
Daniel Kiernan
published 4.5
3.97
Kerry Nowicki
published 4.5
3.95
Cyndy Krietsch
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.84
Diane Taranowski
published 4
3.27
Ann Park
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.20
Jeanie Szmanda
published 3.5
3.11
Juliann Abderholden
published 3.5
2.80
Jessica Wagner
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.

Cyndy Krietsch + Colette Gramins7651% games−3.4% vs expected
Kerry Nowicki + Colette Gramins6451% games−6.3% vs expected
Ann Park + Diane Taranowski0935% games−6.7% vs expected
Juliann Abderholden + Ann Park0729% games−6.8% vs expected
Juliann Abderholden + Diane Taranowski123 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.

4.5
Colette Gramins
69W–40L career · 1 line in 2026
1%88%11%
4.33
4.5
Daniel Kiernan
0W–11L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
4.5
Kerry Nowicki
91W–109L career · no lines in 2026
59%41%<1%
3.97
4.5
Cyndy Krietsch
11W–19L career · 1 line in 2026
64%36%<1%
3.95
4
Diane Taranowski
5W–18L career · no lines in 2026
1%86%13%
3.84
4
Ann Park
14W–46L career · 4 lines in 2026
95%5%<1%
3.27
3.5
Jeanie Szmanda
71W–61L career · no lines in 2026
8%91%2%
3.20
3.5
Juliann Abderholden
13W–38L career · no lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.11
3
Jacqueline Deberry
28W–39L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%8%
2.80
Jessica Wagner
23W–17L career · no lines in 2026
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.