Teams

ESB:Ladies on the Edge:Ellison

2022 VT Adult 65 & Over Women · 7.0 Adult 65 & Over Women Flight1

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VERMONT

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2022-07-31vs OC:Prime Time:Foulk/JacksonLost 12
L#1 DoublesCynthia Sherburne / Andrea Torello vs Rebecca Foulk / Judith Jackson6-1, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesDawn Bugbee / Donna Ellison vs Priscilla Geoghegan / Kathy Yost4-6, 6-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLynn Bursell / Liz Demas vs Joan Holcombe / Fe Ramos7-6, 4-3
2022-07-31vs OC:Prime Time:Foulk/JacksonWon 21
W#1 DoublesCynthia Sherburne / Andrea Torello vs Susan Edwards / Marcy Galligan6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesDawn Bugbee / Cecily Robbins vs Priscilla Geoghegan / Judith Platt6-1, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLynn Bursell / Liz Demas vs Marion Hampton / Elaine Meek6-7, 4-5
2022-07-24vs OC:Prime Time:Foulk/JacksonLost 01
L#3 DoublesDonna Ellison / Joan Hauf vs Joan Holcombe / Fe Ramos3-6, 5-7
2022-07-24vs OC:Prime Time:Foulk/JacksonLost 01
L#3 DoublesDonna Ellison / Joan Hauf vs Malgorzata Donnelly / Kathy Yost6-3, 1-6, 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 standings2 teams · 7.0 Adult 65 & Over Women Flight1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1OC:Prime Time:Foulk/Jackson318413117
2ESB:Ladies on the Edge:Ellison134818118

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 3.08 estimated across 2 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.

3.29
Cynthia Sherburne
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.88
Dawn Bugbee
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Andrea Torello
published
Cathy Chamberlain
published
Cecily Robbins
published
Donna Ellison
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Frances Foster
published
Joan Hauf
published
Liz Demas
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Lynn Bursell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Mimi Pearson
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.

Liz Demas + Lynn Bursell2343% gamesnot enough data
Cynthia Sherburne + Andrea Torello303 matchesnot enough data
Donna Ellison + Dawn Bugbee213 matchesnot enough data
Dawn Bugbee + Lynn Bursell213 matchesnot 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.

3.5
Cynthia Sherburne
30W–41L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.29
3.5
Dawn Bugbee
13W–22L career · 2 lines in 2022
82%18%<1%
2.88
Andrea Torello
3W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Cathy Chamberlain
2W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Cecily Robbins
2W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Donna Ellison
7W–12L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Frances Foster
0W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Joan Hauf
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Liz Demas
18W–30L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Lynn Bursell
36W–39L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Mimi Pearson
1W–0L career · no lines in 2022
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.