Teams

DLanier

2022 Capital Summer 55 & Over Singles League · 3.5 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.42 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2022-08-03vs MBarthalmusWon 21
L#1 SinglesTakako Schenberger vs Melissa Hill6-4, 3-6, 0-1
W#2 SinglesCamille Conzola vs Chequetta Ann Nobles Hall6-4, 6-3
W#3 SinglesLaurie Reiss vs Frauke Mirenda6-0, 6-2
2022-07-18vs MBarthalmusWon 20
W#1 SinglesDeb Lanier vs Gillian Kelleher6-4, 1-6, 1-0
W#3 SinglesTakako Schenberger vs Ana Maria Allessi6-1, 6-2
2022-07-11vs MBarthalmusSplit 11
L#1 SinglesCarolina Robayo vs Gillian Kelleher5-7, 3-6
W#3 SinglesCecilia Edgar vs Frauke Mirenda6-1, 6-0
2022-06-20vs MBarthalmusWon 30
W#1 SinglesDeb Lanier vs Melissa Hill6-3, 6-3
W#2 SinglesLaurie Reiss vs Ana Maria Allessi7-5, 6-1
W#3 SinglesCamille Conzola vs Jocelyn Badulis7-5, 7-6
2022-06-14vs MBarthalmusWon 20
W#1 SinglesCarolina Robayo vs Gillian Kelleher6-4, 6-2
W#3 SinglesCamille Conzola vs Chequetta Ann Nobles Hall6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2022-06-13vs MBarthalmusWon 21
W#1 SinglesTakako Schenberger vs Marina Barthalmus6-3, 6-2
L#2 SinglesLaurie Reiss vs Gillian Kelleher3-6, 1-6
W#3 SinglesCecilia Edgar vs Ana Maria Allessi6-4, 4-6, 1-0
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 standings for 3.5 Women 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 3.18 estimated across 6 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.

3.56
Deb Lanier
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.36
Camille Conzola
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.19
Takako Schenberger
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.15
Laurie Reiss
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.15
Carolina Robayo
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
2.71
Cecilia Edgar
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
Toni Paladino
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.

Takako Schenberger + Deb Lanier27561% games−3.1% vs expected
Carolina Robayo + Camille Conzola4347% gamesnot enough data
Carolina Robayo + Cecilia Edgar3245% gamesnot enough data
Cecilia Edgar + Laurie Reiss2348% gamesnot enough data
Takako Schenberger + Laurie Reiss224 matchesnot enough data
Cecilia Edgar + Deb Lanier303 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
Deb Lanier
488W–223L career · type A · 2 lines in 2022
<1%33%67%
3.56
3.5
Camille Conzola
258W–178L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%86%13%
3.36
3.5
Takako Schenberger
243W–154L career · 3 lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.19
3.5
Laurie Reiss
234W–202L career · 3 lines in 2022
12%87%<1%
3.15
3.5
Carolina Robayo
145W–190L career · 2 lines in 2022
13%86%<1%
3.15
3
Cecilia Edgar
284W–255L career · 2 lines in 2022
6%93%1%
2.71
Toni Paladino
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.