Teams

Walters, Lydia

2026 Combo 40 & Over-JXN · Women 5.5

12 players · average NTRP 2.62 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-31vs Manuel, ElaineWon 20
W#1 DoublesWendy Ellis / Jill Miller vs Stephanie Jierski / Kim Maureen Price3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKatie Bumgarner / Danette Tannehill vs Candice Ross / Elaine Manuel6-4, 7-5
2026-08-24vs Powers, CatherineWon 30
W#1 DoublesKate Feldman / Rose Edmonston vs Catherine Powers / Laura Collins6-4, 6-0
W#2 DoublesLydia Walters / Jill Webb vs Tonya Morgan Barber / Allison Carroll6-1, 7-6
W#3 DoublesVirginia Pearson / Debbie Lominick vs Susan Godfrey / Robyn Pressley7-6, 2-6, 1-0
2026-08-10vs Prince, TerriWon 21
W#1 DoublesWendy Ellis / Danette Tannehill vs Melissa West / Terri Prince4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesDebbie Lominick / Dana Germany vs Aneda Julkenbeck / Rachel Manning7-5, 6-0
L#3 DoublesLissa Galloway / Katie Bumgarner vs Gwynn Cunningham / Michelle Loftin7-6, 3-6, 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 standings5 teams · Women 5.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Smith, Ashley2042430
2Walters, Lydia1021330
3Powers, Catherine1133647
4Coins, Jimmie0103637
5Prince, Terri02241069

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 2.47 estimated across 10 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.

2.90
Kate Feldman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.78
Katie Bumgarner
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
2.77
Jill Webb
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.71
Virginia Pearson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.50
Dana Germany
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.35
Debbie Lominick
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.30
Rose Edmonston
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.23
Danette Tannehill
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.19
Lydia Walters
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.00
Lissa Galloway
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Wendy Ellis
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
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.

Kate Feldman
35W–32L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
2.90
Katie Bumgarner
15W–25L career · 5 lines in 2026
2%94%5%
2.78
Jill Webb
44W–63L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
2.77
Virginia Pearson
11W–29L career · 2 lines in 2026
5%93%1%
2.71
3
Dana Germany
12W–33L career · 1 line in 2026
49%51%<1%
2.50
2.5
Debbie Lominick
3W–13L career · type M · 2 lines in 2026
0%88%12%
2.35
Rose Edmonston
20W–30L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%93%7%
2.30
2.5
Danette Tannehill
18W–24L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%98%2%
2.23
Lydia Walters
11W–40L career · 1 line in 2026
0%99%1%
2.19
2.5
Cindy Martin Williams
1W–19L career · no lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.00
Lissa Galloway
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Wendy Ellis
17W–30L career · 2 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.