Teams

WI Tri-Level Delta Women NCL Stevens Pt Guilliams

2023 WI Tri-Level · Delta

6 players · average NTRP 4.00 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
W#1 DoublesCarolyn Blair / Betsy Wolf vs Renee Wesolowski / Sandy Stargardt6-1, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesLori Guilliams / Marlene Fawley vs Tanya Barth / Claire Fabian6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSarah Wrasse / Meredith Congdon vs Nicole Krolak / Sandra Egstad1-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#1 DoublesBetsy Wolf / Carolyn Blair vs Nichole Matowitz / Karlyn Jakusz1-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMarlene Fawley / Lori Guilliams vs Tara Cooper / Kari Worzella6-3, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMeredith Congdon / Sarah Wrasse vs Kelly Shippy / La Rue Davison6-7, 1-6
L#1 DoublesCarolyn Blair / Betsy Wolf vs Alisa Luedtke / Renee Wesolowski3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesLori Guilliams / Marlene Fawley vs Donna Hansen / Sandy Stargardt7-5, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMeredith Congdon / Sarah Wrasse vs Sandra Egstad / Nicole Krolak5-7, 2-6
L#1 DoublesCarolyn Blair / Betsy Wolf vs Bobbie Toth / Nichole Matowitz6-2, 1-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesLori Guilliams / Marlene Fawley vs Tara Cooper / Kristin Marquard6-3, 6-4
L#3 DoublesMeredith Congdon / Sarah Wrasse vs Kelly Shippy / La Rue Davison4-6, 2-6
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 standings3 teams · Delta
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Tri-Level Delta Women NCL Marshfield Hansen31751293
2WI Tri-Level Delta Women NCL Stevens Point Jakusz227514108
3WI Tri-Level Delta Women NCL Stevens Pt Guilliams134819122

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.

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.

Betsy Wolf
published 4
Carolyn Blair
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
Lori Guilliams
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Marlene Fawley
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Meredith Congdon
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Sarah Wrasse
usually #3 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.

Meredith Congdon + Sarah Wrasse1640% games+4.1% vs expected
Lori Guilliams + Carolyn Blair2842% games−0.7% vs expected
Marlene Fawley + Lori Guilliams3252% 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
Betsy Wolf
4W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Carolyn Blair
19W–24L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Lori Guilliams
28W–20L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Marlene Fawley
5W–16L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Meredith Congdon
34W–35L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Sarah Wrasse
11W–19L career · 4 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.