CDTA Winter 40 & Over W/E — 2025
View on TennisLink · Match Planner · Roster
| # | Team | W | L | IW | IL | SW | SL | GW | GL | G% | #P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tam (Bhat) | 8 | 2 | 27 | 13 | 60 | 36 | 419 | 344 | 54.9% | 27 |
| 2 | MT Bann (Spurgeon) | 6 | 4 | 25 | 15 | 55 | 39 | 395 | 337 | 54.0% | 19 |
| 3 | Tam (Kanev) | 6 | 4 | 22 | 18 | 53 | 39 | 398 | 303 | 56.8% | 16 |
| 4 | Forest View (Rustagi) | 5 | 5 | 18 | 22 | 42 | 49 | 358 | 382 | 48.4% | 20 |
| 5 | Naperville (Esancy) | 4 | 6 | 21 | 19 | 46 | 45 | 350 | 345 | 50.4% | 20 |
| 6 | Tam (Robbie) | 1 | 9 | 7 | 33 | 20 | 68 | 232 | 441 | 34.5% | 16 |
How each team's probability of finishing 1st evolves as match results come in.
Based on 10000 simulations (30 played, 0 remaining, strategy: availability) · Updated Mar 7, 2026
| # | Team | Avg W | Avg L | Win% | 1st% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CDTA W 40&OM3.5 2.Tam Bhat Sat 3 $22 | 8.0 | 2.0 | 80% | 100% |
| 2 | CDTA W 40&OM3.5 1.MT Bann Spurgeon Sun 2 $27 | 6.0 | 4.0 | 60% | 0% |
| 3 | CDTA W 40&OM3.5 3.Tam Kanev Sun 5 $22 | 6.0 | 4.0 | 60% | 0% |
| 4 | CDTA W 40&OM3.5 5.Forest View Rustagi Sun 4 $23 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 50% | 0% |
| 5 | CDTA W 40&OM3.5 6.Naperville Esancy Sat 4 $24 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 40% | 0% |
| 6 | CDTA W 40&OM3.5 4.Tam Robbie Sat 3 $22 | 1.0 | 9.0 | 10% | 0% |
| Team | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CDTA W 40&OM3.5 2.Tam Bhat Sat 3 $22 | 100% | — | — | — | — | — |
| CDTA W 40&OM3.5 1.MT Bann Spurgeon Sun 2 $27 | — | 100% | — | — | — | — |
| CDTA W 40&OM3.5 3.Tam Kanev Sun 5 $22 | — | — | 100% | — | — | — |
| CDTA W 40&OM3.5 5.Forest View Rustagi Sun 4 $23 | — | — | — | 100% | — | — |
| CDTA W 40&OM3.5 6.Naperville Esancy Sat 4 $24 | — | — | — | — | 100% | — |
| CDTA W 40&OM3.5 4.Tam Robbie Sat 3 $22 | — | — | — | — | — | 100% |