Teams

Sodini/Memphis

2024 Adult 55 & Over-Memphis · 3.5 Women 55 & Over

10 players · average NTRP 3.14 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2024-04-13vs Wright/MemphisLost 03
L#1 DoublesBarby Patterson / Teri McDowell vs Kathy Wright / Patricia Hayes2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesCheryl Sodini / Anne Thielemier vs Hollie Federman / Betty Clark4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesGrace Montgomery / Ginger Hopkins vs Jenny Garner / Leigh Norrid0-6, 0-6
2024-04-06vs Edwards/MemphisLost 03
L#1 DoublesCindy Barnett / Anne Thielemier vs Kimberly Mitchell / Trisha Dooley1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesLisa Sodini / Teri McDowell vs Lisa Edwards / Donna Wolfanger3-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesKay Horne / Grace Montgomery vs Jacqueline Sharp / Jean Miller7-6, 4-6, 0-1
2024-03-09vs Boudreau/MemphisLost 12
W#1 DoublesCindy Barnett / Anne Thielemier vs Melinda Boudreau / Christine Mendoza6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesCheryl Sodini / Lisa Sodini vs Roz Wallace / Trish Kennedy5-7, 3-6
L#3 DoublesKay Horne / Grace Montgomery vs Linda Bryan / Sandra Horn2-6, 4-6
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 3.5 Women 55 & Over 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 2.86 estimated across 4 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.

Anne Thielemier
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.18
Cindy Barnett
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.82
Teri McDowell
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.78
Dana Ferry
published 3
Cheryl Sodini
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Ginger Hopkins
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Grace Montgomery
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.66
Barby Patterson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
Kay Horne
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Lisa Sodini
usually #2 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.

Dana Ferry + Ginger Hopkins0523% games−16.4% vs expected
Teri McDowell + Lisa Sodini134 matchesnot enough data
Barby Patterson + Teri McDowell033 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
Anne Thielemier
4W–9L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Cindy Barnett
4W–8L career · 3 lines in 2024
8%91%1%
3.18
Teri McDowell
1W–15L career · 2 lines in 2024
92%8%<1%
2.82
3
Dana Ferry
0W–9L career · no lines in 2024
2%94%4%
2.78
3
Cheryl Sodini
0W–7L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Ginger Hopkins
0W–7L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
3
Grace Montgomery
0W–3L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Barby Patterson
0W–8L career · 1 line in 2024
11%88%<1%
2.66
Kay Horne
6W–18L career · 6 lines in 2024
not enough data
Lisa Sodini
1W–6L career · 2 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.