Teams

GF:Fire & Ice II:Woods/Farrington

2021 ECT Adult 40 & Over Women · 4.0 Women

11 players · average NTRP 4.17 / SOUTHERN CONNECTICUT

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 →
Schedule6 played
2021-07-03vs NHH:Double Shots II:Barra/RossWon 21
W#1 DoublesTeresa Panico / Signe Breeden vs Lynn Siebert / Kristen Doyle6-2, 5-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesJensa Morris vs Nancy Inglese0-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJane Farrington / Ginny McParland vs Coleen McCarthy / Kirsten Page6-7, 6-3, 0-1
2021-06-19vs OSB:O'Neil/GriffinWon 30
W#1 DoublesSigne Breeden / Teresa Panico vs Caitlin McDonough / Christine Schneider6-1, 6-3
W#1 SinglesJensa Morris vs Patricia Kusmierski7-5, 6-4
W#2 DoublesJane Farrington / Dani Woods vs Robin Batchelder / Crystal Cowles6-1, 6-3
2021-05-22vs LS:McAuliffeSplit 22
L#1 DoublesSigne Breeden / Dani Woods vs Laurie Zrenda / Leah Ward6-7, 6-3, 0-1
W#1 SinglesJensa Morris vs Lisa Mazzucco7-5, 6-4
L#2 DoublesMary Barnes / Lynn Gurnham vs Camille Burlingham / Carolyn Fox-Robertson5-7, 6-2, 0-1
W#3 DoublesPamelia Parker / Janet Burton vs Donna Sullivan / Karin Fisher6-0, 6-2
2021-05-15vs LS:McAuliffeWon 30
W#1 DoublesJane Farrington / Signe Breeden vs Leah Ward / Laurie Zrenda7-6, 6-2
W#1 SinglesPamelia Parker vs Lisa Mazzucco7-6, 6-4
W#2 DoublesTeresa Panico / Dani Woods vs Suzanne Mc Auliffe / Hally Schoen6-2, 6-1
2021-05-01vs OSB:O'Neil/GriffinWon 31
W#1 DoublesSigne Breeden / Dani Woods vs Eileen Griffin / Caitlin McDonough6-2, 6-2
W#1 SinglesPamelia Parker vs Patricia Kusmierski6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMary Barnes / Sharon Marczewski vs Robin Batchelder / Mary O'Neil6-4, 6-4
L#3 DoublesGinny McParland / Janet Burton vs Kathy Pavelcak / Nancy Schumann0-6, 7-6, 0-1
2021-04-18vs NHH:Double Shots II:Barra/RossWon 40
W#1 DoublesTeresa Panico / Signe Breeden vs Melissa Barra / Kirsten Page6-4, 6-3
W#1 SinglesJensa Morris vs Norma Thompson6-2, 5-5
W#2 DoublesLynn Gurnham / Dani Woods vs Lynn Siebert / Melissa Lawson6-4, 7-6
W#3 DoublesMary Barnes / Sharon Marczewski vs Liz van Leer / Kristin Daley6-0, 6-2
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 · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1GF:Fire & Ice II:Woods/Farrington0618614178
2NHH:Double Shots II:Barra/Ross06121225225
3LS:McAuliffe0691534250
4OSB:O'Neil/Griffin0681634233

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 3.76 estimated across 9 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.

4.19
Signe Breeden
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.91
Pamelia Parker
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.79
Teresa Panico
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.73
Ginny McParland
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.67
Mary Barnes
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.67
Jane Farrington
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.66
Dani Woods
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.64
Sharon Marczewski
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.58
Janet Burton
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Jensa Morris
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Lynn Gurnham
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.

Jane Farrington + Teresa Panico8364% games+8.9% vs expected
Dani Woods + Teresa Panico9462% games+5.1% vs expected
Signe Breeden + Teresa Panico321063% games+5.1% vs expected
Janet Burton + Pamelia Parker4551% games+4.8% vs expected
Mary Barnes + Jane Farrington4450% games+4.1% vs expected
Mary Barnes + Pamelia Parker8262% games+2.6% vs expected
Jane Farrington + Dani Woods484352% games+2.5% vs expected
Signe Breeden + Sharon Marczewski3452% games+0.9% 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.

4.5
Signe Breeden
144W–103L career · 6 lines in 2021
7%92%1%
4.19
Pamelia Parker
153W–84L career · 3 lines in 2021
<1%75%24%
3.91
Teresa Panico
123W–84L career · 4 lines in 2021
1%93%5%
3.79
4
Ginny McParland
13W–12L career · type S · 2 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.73
Mary Barnes
62W–49L career · 3 lines in 2021
10%89%1%
3.67
Jane Farrington
115W–85L career · 3 lines in 2021
10%89%<1%
3.67
4
Dani Woods
138W–122L career · 5 lines in 2021
11%88%<1%
3.66
Sharon Marczewski
53W–43L career · 2 lines in 2021
15%85%<1%
3.64
Janet Burton
50W–59L career · 2 lines in 2021
26%74%<1%
3.58
Jensa Morris
44W–31L career · 4 lines in 2021
not enough data
Lynn Gurnham
1W–1L career · no 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.