Teams

AuBuchon/Blades

2024 Adult 55 & Over · Women 7.0

12 players · average NTRP 3.00 / ST. LOUIS

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2024-06-02vs Burkart/RechtlichLost 12
L#1 DoublesLinda Eisenbeis / Mary Alice Grady vs Kathy Wennemann / Ellen Mrazek5-7, 6-1, 0-1
W#2 DoublesSandra Johnson / Patty Marcanik vs Carla Burkart / Tina Sneed6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesMary Strouth / Maria Blades vs Michelle Brower-Kitchens / Sheila Ricken2-6, 1-6
2024-05-04vs Burkart/RechtlichLost 03
L#1 DoublesShirley Graham / Maria Blades vs Norma Feldman / Ellen Mrazek3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesDebbie Kopff / Mary Alice Grady vs Tina Sneed / Sheila Ricken2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesKathy Aubuchon / Mary Strouth vs Carla Burkart / Barbara Kelly0-6
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 standings for Women 7.0 have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 2.93 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.

3.30
Lucy Klingler
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.17
Mary Alice Grady
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.15
Linda Eisenbeis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.00
Terry Morrison
published
2.95
Susan Kuehnle
published
2.85
Maria Blades
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.84
Mary Strouth
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.73
Debbie Kopff
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.38
Kathy Aubuchon
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Patty Marcanik
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Sandra Johnson
published
Shirley Graham
usually #1 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.

Kathy Aubuchon + Maria Blades5349% games+10.0% vs expected
Shirley Graham + Terry Morrison10851% games+5.9% vs expected
Kathy Aubuchon + Terry Morrison1538% games+2.9% vs expected
Susan Kuehnle + Linda Eisenbeis51246% games+0.8% vs expected
Lucy Klingler + Linda Eisenbeis3448% games−3.5% vs expected
Linda Eisenbeis + Debbie Kopff1443% games−3.6% vs expected
Susan Kuehnle + Maria Blades3639% games−11.0% vs expected
Maria Blades + Linda Eisenbeis2536% games−16.3% 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.

Lucy Klingler
73W–40L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%93%6%
3.30
Mary Alice Grady
83W–63L career · 2 lines in 2024
9%90%1%
3.17
Linda Eisenbeis
61W–80L career · 4 lines in 2024
12%87%<1%
3.15
Terry Morrison
27W–39L career · no lines in 2024
50%50%<1%
3.00
Susan Kuehnle
49W–77L career · no lines in 2024
<1%66%34%
2.95
Maria Blades
70W–86L career · 2 lines in 2024
87%13%<1%
2.85
Mary Strouth
48W–86L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%89%10%
2.84
3
Debbie Kopff
5W–19L career · 1 line in 2024
4%94%2%
2.73
Kathy Aubuchon
18W–115L career · 1 line in 2024
83%17%<1%
2.38
Patty Marcanik
13W–8L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Sandra Johnson
37W–75L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Shirley Graham
56W–61L career · 1 line 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.