Teams

Lafayette - Whaley

2026 LAF Adult 65 & Over - Women · 3.5 Laf (65&O) Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.50 / LOUISIANA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2024-09-21vs Lafayette - BordleeLost 12
W#1 DoublesPolly Strickland / Kathy Simon vs Dailene Melancon / Cecelia Roman7-6, 7-5
L#2 DoublesGlenda Tucker / Shelia Landry vs Kathryn Bordlee / Rene Pearson6-0, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJacquelyn Royer / Karen Stelly vs Jan Greer / Patricia Latch6-3, 2-6, 0-1
2024-09-20vs Lafayette - AndrepontWon 30
W#1 DoublesPolly Strickland / Karen Stelly vs Cindy Gates / Cindy Jackson6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesKathy Simon / Patty Whaley vs Janice Deshotels / Rebecca Vantiger6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesShelia Landry / Aileen Prevost vs Debby Andrepont / Pat Ardoin6-1, 6-0
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 standings3 teams · 3.5 Laf (65&O) Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Lafayette - Andrepont000000
2Lafayette - Bordlee000000
3Lafayette - Whaley000000

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 3.26 estimated across 8 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.

3.46
Aileen Prevost
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.44
Glenda Tucker
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.36
Patty Whaley
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.34
Polly Strickland
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.27
Shelia Landry
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.22
Karen Stelly
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.05
Melanie Hensgens
published
2.98
Jacquelyn Royer
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Kathy Simon
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.

Shelia Landry + Aileen Prevost303 matchesnot enough data
Shelia Landry + Melanie Hensgens033 matchesnot enough data
Karen Stelly + Polly Strickland123 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
Aileen Prevost
4W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%62%38%
3.46
Glenda Tucker
14W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%67%33%
3.44
Patty Whaley
3W–3L career · 1 line in 2026
1%84%16%
3.36
Polly Strickland
4W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%87%12%
3.34
Shelia Landry
19W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Karen Stelly
7W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.22
Melanie Hensgens
4W–6L career · no lines in 2026
35%65%<1%
3.05
Jacquelyn Royer
3W–9L career · 1 line in 2026
57%43%<1%
2.98
Kathy Simon
1W–3L career · no lines in 2026
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.