Teams

Scott, Kathy

2025 Adult 55 & Over-JXN · Women 4.0

11 players · average NTRP 3.62 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2025-04-14vs Moseley, SallieWon 20
W#1 DoublesCheryl Clayton / Wanza Anderson vs Colleen Campbell / Leslie Ashford6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesBarbara Rushton / Jeanne Moak vs Sandy Temple / Sallie Moseley4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-04-06vs Moseley, SallieLost 02
L#1 DoublesCathy McIntyre / Leisa McCool vs September Moore / Rebecca Youngblood4-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesBarbara West / Susan Jackson vs Colleen Campbell / Mary Sawardecker4-6, 2-5
2025-03-30vs Baine, PshanLost 03
L#1 DoublesWanza Anderson / Cheryl Clayton vs Vanessa Wilson / Becky Pardue4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesBarbara Rushton / Jeanne Moak vs Lauree Davis / Melissa K Beach3-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesCathy McIntyre / Barbara West vs Gretchen Ware / Angie DeLeon5-7, 1-6
2025-03-23vs Gibson, AnneWon 21
W#1 DoublesMary D Randall / Susan Jackson vs Lela Carter / Gayla Sanders6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJordan Goodwin / Leisa McCool vs Kristin Steen / Deborah Norman6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesBarbara Rushton / Wanza Anderson vs Bethany Szabo / Christine Guizerix6-7, 6-1, 0-1
2025-03-16vs Moseley, SallieWon 30
W#1 DoublesWanza Anderson / Cheryl Clayton vs Leslie Ashford / Mary Scott Shepherd6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLeisa McCool / Mary D Randall vs September Moore / Rebecca Youngblood6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesCathy McIntyre / Mary Beth Cantrell vs Colleen Campbell / Sallie Moseley6-3, 7-5
2025-03-07vs Gibson, AnneWon 21
L#1 DoublesJeanne Moak / Jennifer Evans vs Lela Carter / M Donna Leis0-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesWanza Anderson / Cheryl Clayton vs Christine Guizerix / Suzanne Colbert4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLeisa McCool / Jordan Goodwin vs Nina Tomlinson / Lila Gibbs6-3, 6-1
2025-03-02vs Baine, PshanLost 12
W#1 DoublesWanza Anderson / Cheryl Clayton vs Pshan Baine / Emily Barnes6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesBarbara Rushton / Jeanne Moak vs Lauree Davis / Vanessa Wilson2-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesLeisa McCool / Susan Jackson vs Melissa K Beach / Mary Taylor3-6, 3-6
2025-02-09vs Baine, PshanLost 12
W#1 DoublesLeisa McCool / Jordan Goodwin vs Michele Rumbley / Emily Barnes2-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCathy McIntyre / Jennifer Evans vs Melissa K Beach / Mary Taylor1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesCheryl Clayton / Susan Jackson vs Lauree Davis / Vanessa Wilson2-6, 2-6
2025-02-03vs Gibson, AnneWon 21
W#1 DoublesLeisa McCool / Susan Jackson vs M Donna Leis / Lila Gibbs6-3, 6-7, 1-0
L#2 DoublesWanza Anderson / Mary Beth Cantrell vs Anne Gibson / Libby Jones4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesBarbara Rushton / Jeanne Moak vs Christine Guizerix / Nina Tomlinson4-6, 6-4, 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 standings1 teams · Women 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Scott, Kathy54151230236

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 3.66 estimated across 7 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.

3.89
Leisa McCool
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
3.81
Mary Beth Cantrell
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.73
Wanza Anderson
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
3.73
Cheryl Clayton
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.65
Barbara Rushton
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.64
Jordan Goodwin
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Barbara West
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.16
Cathy McIntyre
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Jeanne Moak
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Kathy Scott
published
Mary D Randall
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Barbara Rushton + Cheryl Clayton12065% games+16.1% vs expected
Wanza Anderson + Cheryl Clayton11358% games+13.3% vs expected
Barbara Rushton + Jeanne Moak6253% games−2.4% vs expected
Barbara West + Wanza Anderson123 matchesnot enough data
Jordan Goodwin + Leisa McCool303 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.

Leisa McCool
43W–25L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
3.89
Mary Beth Cantrell
64W–62L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.81
Wanza Anderson
22W–13L career · 7 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Cheryl Clayton
35W–8L career · 6 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.73
3.5
Barbara Rushton
33W–14L career · type A · 5 lines in 2025
<1%12%88%
3.65
Jordan Goodwin
35W–16L career · 3 lines in 2025
15%85%<1%
3.64
3.5
Barbara West
7W–10L career · type A · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Cathy McIntyre
7W–19L career · 4 lines in 2025
11%88%<1%
3.16
Jeanne Moak
14W–9L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kathy Scott
2W–2L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary D Randall
3W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
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.