Suzanne Spadafora
152 matches · 63W–89L · seasons 2019–2026
Captains: add Suzanne Spadafora to your scout list and get a weekly note on what they did. Create a free account to start one.
Match history152 matches
L
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
7-6, 4-6, 0-1
W
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
7-5, 6-2
L
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
3-6, 6-1, 0-1
W
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
6-2, 1-6, 1-0
W
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
6-2, 7-6
L
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
7-6, 4-6, 1-0
L
Katherine McDowell
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
4-6, 4-6
Teams32 teams · 2020–2026
Over timerating by season, and how you rank
By level9 levels played
4.0
50%
36W–36L · 51.6% of games
7.0
38.5%
5W–8L · 51.8% of games
7.5
45.5%
5W–6L · 55% of games
8.0
40%
2W–3L · 47.4% of games
3.0mixed
0W–1L
not enough matches yet
4.0mixed
33.3%
3W–6L · 45.3% of games
7.5mixed
66.7%
4W–2L · 42.7% of games
8.0mixed
25%
8W–24L · 39.1% of games
8.5mixed
0W–3L
not enough matches yet
Games won matters more than matches won — NTRP adjusts on margins.
By lineusually #1 Doubles, 33% of the time
#1 Doubles
33%
50 matches
#2 Doubles
18%
27 matches
#3 Doubles
15%
23 matches
#1 Singles
11%
17 matches
#2 Singles
11%
17 matches
#1 Female Doubles
5%
8 matches
How often, across every team and every match we hold — including ones that do not count toward a rating. Advanced stats has a court-position table too, and it answers a different question: how well you do there, over matches that count. A team’s own page shows how that one team uses you.
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.
The mark of great sportsmen is not how good they are at their best, but how good they are at their worst.