Teams

NJD / Racqueteers

Adult 55 & Over Summer · 7.0 Women - Central Day NJD

15 players · average NTRP 3.58 / NEW JERSEY

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2021-07-28vs Nassau Gino's GalsWon 21
W#1 DoublesShelley Berger / Joan Kern vs Karen Vogelzang / Donna Nagel6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesLinda Peters / Julie Trinity vs Ann de Waele / Diane Elias6-0, 6-0
L#3 DoublesMorgann Loyd / Jan Skeuse vs JANET van MOL / Carla Gaeta2-6, 3-6
2021-07-21vs Hopewell CrossoversWon 21
W#1 DoublesShelley Berger / Joan Kern vs Lolita Clyburn / Susan Guttmann6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJulie Trinity / Nancy Wilbert vs Debbie Hische / Rosanne Johnston6-2, 6-3
L#3 DoublesCathleen Ferns / Kris Fortune vs Kay Chen / Anne Kabay6-7, 6-3, 0-1
2021-06-28vs Nassau Gino's GalsLost 12
W#1 DoublesJoan Kern / Linda Peters vs Ann de Waele / Charlotte Drinkwater6-2, 7-6
L#2 DoublesMarie Collazo / Nancy Wilbert vs Sarah Karchere / JANET van MOL4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesMorgann Loyd / Karen Boyle vs Stephanie van Zanten / Carla Gaeta6-3, 6-7, 0-1
2021-06-23vs Hopewell CrossoversLost 12
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Ballantine / Karen Boyle vs Kay Chen / Lolita Clyburn1-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesShelley Berger / Ethel Thau vs Mary Beth Mapes / Rosanne Johnston6-4, 1-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesCathleen Ferns / Kris Fortune vs Anne Kabay / Susan Guttmann6-3, 6-2
2021-06-16vs PRC Hot FlashesWon 30
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Ballantine / Linda Peters vs Hanako Kusakawa / Chiyoko Ebisawa6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJanet Ronan / Joan Kern vs Marie Mascio / Chantal Meldrum4-6, 6-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJan Skeuse / Constance Hindle vs Helene Fair / Barbara Wilson3-6, 6-2, 1-0
2020-07-15vs PRC Hot FlashesWon 21
W#1 DoublesShelley Berger / Marie Collazo vs Hanako Kusakawa / Chiyoko Ebisawa6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJanet Ronan / Linda Peters vs Marie Mascio / Chantal Meldrum7-5, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesEthel Thau / Constance Hindle vs Barbara Wilson / Helene Fair2-6, 1-6
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 standings4 teams · 7.0 Women - Central Day NJD
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Nassau Gino's Gals0612615141
2NJD / Racqueteers0611717146
3Hopewell Crossovers0671126186
4PRC Hot Flashes0661228185

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 3.28 estimated across 12 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.

3.66
Joan Kern
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.51
Linda Peters
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.49
Shelley Berger
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.43
Marie Collazo
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.39
Elizabeth Ballantine
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.34
Nancy Wilbert
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.29
Julie Trinity
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Constance Hindle
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.14
Karen Boyle
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.08
Janet Ronan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.05
Kris Fortune
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.04
Cathleen Ferns
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.92
Jan Skeuse
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Ethel Thau
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Morgann Loyd
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.

Constance Hindle + Nancy Wilbert9160% games+8.0% vs expected
Linda Peters + Nancy Wilbert7264% games+7.3% vs expected
Elizabeth Ballantine + Karen Boyle8361% games+6.4% vs expected
Marie Collazo + Joan Kern1544% games+5.3% vs expected
Janet Ronan + Constance Hindle2351% games+3.8% vs expected
Joan Kern + Shelley Berger161154% games+3.7% vs expected
Marie Collazo + Nancy Wilbert28961% games+2.7% vs expected
Linda Peters + Elizabeth Ballantine5267% games+2.0% 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.

4
Joan Kern
138W–136L career · 4 lines in 2021
10%89%<1%
3.66
Linda Peters
153W–110L career · 4 lines in 2021
47%53%<1%
3.51
Shelley Berger
152W–152L career · 4 lines in 2021
53%47%<1%
3.49
3.5
Marie Collazo
259W–170L career · 2 lines in 2021
<1%70%30%
3.43
3.5
Elizabeth Ballantine
70W–42L career · 2 lines in 2021
<1%80%20%
3.39
Nancy Wilbert
81W–43L career · 2 lines in 2021
<1%88%11%
3.34
Julie Trinity
15W–6L career · 2 lines in 2021
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Constance Hindle
44W–36L career · 2 lines in 2021
not enough data
Karen Boyle
33W–22L career · 2 lines in 2021
14%86%<1%
3.14
3.5
Janet Ronan
62W–64L career · 2 lines in 2021
28%72%<1%
3.08
Kris Fortune
57W–68L career · 2 lines in 2021
35%65%<1%
3.05
3.5
Cathleen Ferns
75W–101L career · 2 lines in 2021
37%63%<1%
3.04
Jan Skeuse
23W–25L career · 2 lines in 2021
74%26%<1%
2.92
Ethel Thau
6W–15L career · 2 lines in 2021
not enough data
Morgann Loyd
22W–36L career · 2 lines in 2021
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.