Teams

MCAC:Hoagland:Hoagland

2022 Cape Adult 55 & Over Women · 7.0 Women Fit 1

14 players · average NTRP 3.30 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-08-08vs MCAC:Summer LVs:White/HarrisLost 02
L#1 DoublesDiane Leather / Hsueh Mathews vs Tracey Gardella / Audrey Gandini1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesMargaret Russell / Amy Peacock vs Elizabeth Callahan / Allison Whalen3-6, 7-5, 0-1
2022-08-01vs MCAC:Summer LVs:White/HarrisSplit 11
L#1 DoublesKristina Mousseau / Hsueh Mathews vs Tracey Gardella / Ellen Harris4-6, 1-4
W#3 DoublesMargaret Ekholm / Amy Peacock vs Elizabeth Horan / Marjorie White6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2022-07-25vs KG:Kelly:KellyLost 12
W#1 DoublesJoyce Taber / Diane Leather vs Diane Cahill / Estelle Colgan6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesJeannette Cooper / Margaret Russell vs Allison Todoroff / Kathleen Lewis0-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesMargaret Ekholm / Amy Peacock vs Melinda Beggan / Sabina Troy5-7, 1-3
2022-07-11vs MCAC:Summer LVs:White/HarrisLost 12
L#1 DoublesDiane Leather / Kristina Mousseau vs Jeanne Bissonnette / Marjorie White5-7, 2-3
L#2 DoublesAmy Peacock / Margaret Russell vs Patricia Cronin / Paula Casey0-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesDoreen Levitan / Jeannette Cooper vs Elizabeth Horan / Kathleen Davin6-2, 3-6, 1-0
2022-06-20vs KG:Kelly:KellyLost 02
L#1 DoublesJoyce Taber / Nancy Whitehurst vs Kate Gaffney / Allison Todoroff5-7, 3-4
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Doriss / Amy Peacock vs Elsbeth Rowaan / Estelle Colgan3-6, 1-6
2022-06-06vs KG:Kelly:KellyLost 02
L#1 DoublesJoyce Taber / Nancy Whitehurst vs Elsbeth Rowaan / Estelle Colgan1-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMargaret Ekholm / Margaret Russell vs Kathleen Lewis / Jean McCutcheon3-6, 0-6
2022-05-16vs KG:Kelly:KellyLost 02
L#2 DoublesJeannette Cooper / Diane Leather vs Elsbeth Rowaan / Estelle Colgan3-6, 4-5
L#3 DoublesPolly Brazelton / Amy Peacock vs Kate Gaffney / Melinda Beggan1-6, 4-6
2022-05-09vs MCAC:Summer LVs:White/HarrisSplit 11
W#1 DoublesNancy Whitehurst / Joyce Taber vs Jeanne Bissonnette / Marjorie White6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesDeborah Evans / Hsueh Mathews vs Kelly ORourke / Elizabeth Callahan7-6, 2-3, 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 standings for 7.0 Women Fit 1 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 3.11 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.

3.40
Kristina Mousseau
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published
3.24
Amy Peacock
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.22
Elizabeth Doriss
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.14
Margaret Russell
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.10
Deborah Evans
published 3
3.09
Joyce Taber
usually #1 Doubles 69%, also #3 Doubles 23% · published
3.01
Hsueh Mathews
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Doreen Levitan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.70
Netty Hoagland
published
Diane Leather
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Jeannette Cooper
usually #2 Doubles 58%, also #3 Doubles 42% · published
Margaret Ekholm
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Nancy Whitehurst
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
Polly Brazelton
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · 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.

Joyce Taber + Kristina Mousseau351655% games+5.6% vs expected
Joyce Taber + Nancy Whitehurst15851% games−0.6% vs expected
Jeannette Cooper + Joyce Taber101349% games−3.9% vs expected
Hsueh Mathews + Deborah Evans2641% games−4.3% vs expected
Joyce Taber + Amy Peacock2441% games−7.8% vs expected
Hsueh Mathews + Elizabeth Doriss1438% games−10.1% vs expected
Jeannette Cooper + Polly Brazelton9850% gamesnot enough data
Netty Hoagland + Elizabeth Doriss3845% gamesnot 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.

Kristina Mousseau
101W–89L career · 8 lines in 2022
<1%78%22%
3.40
3.5
Amy Peacock
42W–54L career · 6 lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Elizabeth Doriss
33W–68L career · 6 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.22
Margaret Russell
38W–45L career · 4 lines in 2022
14%85%<1%
3.14
3
Deborah Evans
18W–27L career · no lines in 2022
<1%21%79%
3.10
Joyce Taber
144W–136L career · 13 lines in 2022
25%75%<1%
3.09
3.5
Hsueh Mathews
41W–62L career · 3 lines in 2022
48%52%<1%
3.01
3
Doreen Levitan
13W–11L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Netty Hoagland
33W–72L career · no lines in 2022
99%1%<1%
2.70
Diane Leather
4W–7L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Jeannette Cooper
59W–72L career · 12 lines in 2022
not enough data
Margaret Ekholm
20W–34L career · 6 lines in 2022
not enough data
Nancy Whitehurst
99W–101L career · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
Polly Brazelton
36W–44L career · 8 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.