Teams

ELW Christison

2022 Pinellas Mixed 18 & Over Spring · 8.0 MXD Sunday

10 players · average NTRP 3.90 / REGION_3

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2022-05-22vs Seminole Lake RamdeenSplit 11
L#2 DoublesSteve Unger / Precious Cabiling vs John Ramdeen / Joy DSa3-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesDane Houston / Kirsten Willis vs Jordan Lind / JoAnn Lind6-0, 3-6, 1-0
2022-05-12vs Safety Harbor PasinskiLost 01
L#1 DoublesSteve Unger / Elizabeth Gerlach vs Chris Eversole / Olivia Rivas2-6, 4-6
2022-04-24Lost 01
L#2 DoublesSteve Unger / Elizabeth Gerlach vs Jeff Huser / Angelica Barrera3-6, 6-4, 0-1
2022-04-10vs SPTC Holliday 8.0Lost 02
L#1 DoublesWendy Unger / Steve Unger vs Andre Kashou / Amy Bodine2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesPrecious Cabiling / Dane Houston vs Monty Johnson / Laurie Smith6-4, 2-6, 0-1
2022-04-03vs Seminole Lake TimminsLost 02
L#1 DoublesDane Houston / Elizabeth Gerlach vs Kevin Burnett / Diana Zarreke6-4, 5-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesSteve Unger / Kirsten Willis vs Jessica Kuzio / Craig McLeod6-1, 6-7, 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 standings for 8.0 MXD Sunday 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 3.65 estimated across 7 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.

4.11
Elizabeth Gerlach
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.90
Kirsten Willis
published
3.77
Caleb Hirsch
published 4
3.61
Precious Cabiling
published
3.54
Dane Houston
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.47
James Bettencourt
published 3.5
3.14
Steve Unger
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
Jillene Davis
published
Rena Khawam
published
Wendy Unger
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.

Dane Houston + Elizabeth Gerlach2355% gamesnot enough data
Kirsten Willis + Dane Houston134 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
Elizabeth Gerlach
184W–98L career · 3 lines in 2022
20%80%<1%
4.11
Kirsten Willis
10W–16L career · no lines in 2022
<1%78%21%
3.90
4
Caleb Hirsch
13W–14L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.77
Precious Cabiling
9W–9L career · no lines in 2022
20%80%<1%
3.61
4
Dane Houston
155W–187L career · 3 lines in 2022
39%61%<1%
3.54
3.5
James Bettencourt
15W–4L career · no lines in 2022
<1%59%41%
3.47
3.5
Steve Unger
105W–85L career · 5 lines in 2022
14%85%<1%
3.14
Jillene Davis
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Rena Khawam
1W–4L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Wendy Unger
2W–4L career · no 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.