Teams

NITA E 70W65b Naperville TC (Bianchi)

2022 NITA1 ESL Adult 65 & Over · NITA ESL 65 & Over 7.0 Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.25 / NORTHERN ILLINOIS

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
W#1 DoublesDiane Fonte / Catherine Golz vs Julie Koivula / Cathy Kakuska2-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCynthia McCarthy / Miriam Wozniewski vs Darlene Kress / Carol Henry0-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJanet Tietz / Kim Williams vs Paulanna Wotring / Janice Ohlson6-2, 4-5, 1-0
L#1 DoublesCatherine Golz / Jan MacK vs Mara Morris / Peggy Schwerman2-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJanet Tietz / Nancy Williford vs Audene Gordon / Gail Harowski2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesCynthia McCarthy / Miriam Wozniewski vs Zagorka James / Diane Peterson6-3, 6-2
W#1 DoublesMeijan Linda Yu / Diane Fonte vs Mara Morris / Peggy Schwerman6-2, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCatherine Golz / Jan MacK vs Janie Harrison / Shirley Ambutas6-2, 7-6
L#3 DoublesKathleen Leahy / Miriam Wozniewski vs Zagorka James / Diane Peterson2-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesNancy Williford / Meijan Linda Yu vs Julie Koivula / Maryann Webb6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesKatherine Bianchi / Catherine Golz vs Marjorie Bogdalek / Janice Ohlson3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#1 DoublesDiane Fonte / Meijan Linda Yu vs Audene Gordon / Peggy Schwerman6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesCatherine Golz / Nancy Williford vs Shirley Ambutas / Carol Fox6-4, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKathleen Leahy / Kim Williams vs Gail Harowski / Vera Parzatka6-4, 6-4
W#1 DoublesNancy Williford / Meijan Linda Yu vs Maryann Webb / Darlene Kress6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesDiane Fonte / Catherine Golz vs Marjorie Bogdalek / Carol Henry2-6, 0-6
L#1 DoublesSharon Martinez / Nancy Williford vs Cathy Kakuska / Julie Koivula3-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesDiane Fonte / Catherine Golz vs Janice Ohlson / Darlene Kress6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesKatherine Bianchi / Judy Stevens vs Marjorie Bogdalek / Carol Henry3-6, 2-6
W#1 DoublesNancy Williford / Meijan Linda Yu vs Peggy Schwerman / Audene Gordon6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesDiane Fonte / Catherine Golz vs Menorah McCarty / Shirley Ambutas6-3, 7-5
W#3 DoublesSharon Martinez / Judy Stevens vs N/A6-0, 6-0
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 · NITA ESL 65 & Over 7.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NITA E 70W65b Naperville TC (Bianchi)6216821191
2NITA E 70W65c Challenge Fitness (Kennedy)44111332238
3NITA E 70W65a Vaughan (Patterson/Gruidl)2691530201

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 2.95 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.

3.27
Cynthia McCarthy
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.21
Diane Fonte
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.98
Katherine Bianchi
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.73
Sharon Martinez
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.58
Catherine Golz
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
Jan MacK
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Janet Tietz
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Judy Stevens
published
Kathleen Leahy
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Meijan Linda Yu
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Miriam Wozniewski
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Nancy Williford
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Katherine Bianchi + Cynthia McCarthy5348% games−1.9% vs expected
Nancy Williford + Meijan Linda Yu301061% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Williford + Catherine Golz11531% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Williford + Sharon Martinez21137% gamesnot enough data
Jan MacK + Kathleen Leahy7457% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Williford + Diane Fonte6552% gamesnot enough data
Catherine Golz + Sharon Martinez2836% gamesnot enough data
Jan MacK + Catherine Golz4549% 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.

3.5
Cynthia McCarthy
76W–75L career · 2 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Diane Fonte
52W–44L career · 6 lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.21
Katherine Bianchi
84W–66L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%57%43%
2.98
3
Sharon Martinez
115W–167L career · 2 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.73
3
Catherine Golz
67W–80L career · 8 lines in 2022
28%72%<1%
2.58
Jan MacK
47W–44L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Janet Tietz
4W–4L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Judy Stevens
3W–12L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Kathleen Leahy
33W–27L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Meijan Linda Yu
56W–19L career · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
Miriam Wozniewski
39W–80L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Nancy Williford
76W–102L career · 6 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.