Teams

CDTA W 18&OW3.5 13.Centennial Harrison Sun 7 $20

CDTA 2Winter 18 & Over W · E

15 players · average NTRP 3.56 / CHICAGO

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 →
Schedule12 played
L#2 DoublesSarah Haas / Nancy Wikel vs Nedra Harris / Caroline Werther3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#1 DoublesAmy Gelwix / Bonny Tovar vs Elizabeth Cassier / Wendy L Flynn6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesMaggie Lampe / Claudine Seidel vs Vina Maniquis / Catie Hughes7-6, 5-2
L#1 DoublesAmy Gelwix / Claudine Seidel vs Sarah Nicoletta Portsche / Illana Hodges4-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesMaggie Lampe / Katherine Paden vs Jill Buckley / Anne Gallagher7-5, 5-2
L#3 DoublesNancy Wikel / Nancy Spring vs Sheri Jorgensen / Alexandra Anlas6-7, 2-5
L#1 DoublesLiz Hayes / Katherine Paden vs Mary Hunt / Amy Hattery6-7, 2-4
W#2 DoublesMaggie Lampe / Denise de Silva vs Tina DiLorenzo / Kelly Amelse7-6, 5-3
W#3 DoublesChristi Harrison / Nancy Dolan vs Janet Mital / Gia DeCicco6-3, 6-2
W#1 DoublesAmy Gelwix / Maggie Lampe vs Jennifer Brannigan Ward / Morgan Carr0-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKatherine Paden / Claudine Seidel vs Virginia Kosenkova / Christine McPherson6-2, 6-1
W#1 DoublesAmy Gelwix / Ann Roberts vs Tracy Meyer / Kathleen Sullivan6-7, 5-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesDenise de Silva / Nancy Dolan vs Linda Epstein / Nina Mikhelson5-7, 5-4
L#1 DoublesKatherine Paden / Claudine Seidel vs Alexis Hiller / Erica Block4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesNancy Dolan / Liz Hayes vs Donna Myers / Sara Wienkes5-7, 5-3, 1-0
W#1 DoublesMaggie Lampe / Liz Hayes vs Lauren Traficanto / Kim Novak6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesNancy Spring / Sarah Haas vs Leslie Antunovich / Vicki Johnson6-3, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAnn Roberts / Maggie Lampe vs Katie Burnside / Denise Schneider7-6, 0-3, 1-0
W#1 DoublesLiz Hayes / Katherine Paden vs Apple Naughton / Meg Greenberg6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesAnn Roberts / Nancy Wikel vs SoYoung Grote / Beatrisa Paz6-3, 7-5
W#3 DoublesDenise de Silva / Nancy Dolan vs Kristen Lay / Lindsay Taylor6-4, 6-3
L#1 SinglesNancy Dolan vs Rachael Ulizio2-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesKatherine Paden / Claudine Seidel vs Viktorya Sokol / Mindey Johnson7-6, 6-0
W#3 DoublesChristi Harrison / Nancy Spring vs Jennifer Calliss / Vicki Tickman6-2, 3-6, 1-0
W#1 DoublesKatherine Paden / Claudine Seidel vs Allison Biergans / Cathi Cappas6-7, 6-1, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMaggie Lampe / Nancy Wikel vs Amy Byrne / Meg LaMonica2-6, 7-5, 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 standings16 teams · E
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 3.31 estimated across 10 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.

3.62
Bonny Tovar
published 4
3.50
Katherine Paden
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
3.46
Claudine Seidel
published 3.5
3.37
Liz Hayes
published 3.5
3.28
Callie Pekosh
published 3.5
3.26
Maggie Lampe
usually #2 Doubles 71%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
3.26
Denise de Silva
published 3.5
Amy Gelwix
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Ann Roberts
published 3.5
3.25
Christi Harrison
published 3.5
3.12
Nancy Dolan
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
2.98
Nancy Spring
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Lauren Atkins
published
Nancy Wikel
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Stephanie Adam
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · 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.

Christi Harrison + Stephanie Adam5157% games+10.3% vs expected
Nancy Dolan + Christi Harrison4153% games−1.0% vs expected
Nancy Spring + Christi Harrison5252% games−1.7% vs expected
Nancy Dolan + Denise de Silva5549% gamesnot enough data
Katherine Paden + Claudine Seidel6261% gamesnot enough data
Maggie Lampe + Liz Hayes8067% gamesnot enough data
Maggie Lampe + Claudine Seidel4348% gamesnot enough data
Christi Harrison + Denise de Silva2453% 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
Bonny Tovar
55W–32L career · no lines in 2024
20%80%<1%
3.62
Katherine Paden
10W–8L career · 7 lines in 2024
<1%51%49%
3.50
3.5
Claudine Seidel
43W–15L career · no lines in 2024
<1%60%40%
3.46
3.5
Liz Hayes
25W–7L career · no lines in 2024
<1%81%18%
3.37
3.5
Callie Pekosh
23W–7L career · no lines in 2024
2%92%6%
3.28
Maggie Lampe
18W–7L career · 7 lines in 2024
3%93%4%
3.26
3.5
Denise de Silva
17W–18L career · no lines in 2024
3%93%4%
3.26
3.5
Amy Gelwix
8W–2L career · 4 lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Ann Roberts
3W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Christi Harrison
54W–48L career · no lines in 2024
4%93%4%
3.25
Nancy Dolan
68W–82L career · 5 lines in 2024
19%80%<1%
3.12
Nancy Spring
11W–16L career · 3 lines in 2024
57%43%<1%
2.98
Lauren Atkins
8W–3L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Nancy Wikel
2W–5L career · 4 lines in 2024
not enough data
Stephanie Adam
11W–5L career · 5 lines in 2024
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.