Teams

Wynlakes Skier

2026 55 & Over Southern Combo Doubles Night - Montgomery · 7.5 Combo Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.67 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-07-24vs Wynlakes MontgomeryWon 20
W#1 DoublesDarlene Skier / Linda Ward vs Kimberly Mathews / Leah Leal6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesSandra Putz / Sueanne Reynolds vs Carol Telehany / Melissa Snowden6-1, 6-0
2026-07-20vs Wynlakes MontgomeryWon 30
W#1 DoublesDarlene Skier / Cheryl Martin vs Ann Osten / Lisa Zanglin6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesDiane Locke / Michelle Slack vs Leah Leal / Sid Utsey6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesSueanne Reynolds / Sandra Putz vs Carol Telehany / Melissa Snowden6-1, 6-3
2026-07-13vs Wynlakes MontgomeryWon 21
L#1 DoublesDarlene Skier / Tammy Hayes vs Julie Brand / Melissa Snowden5-7, 5-7
W#2 DoublesMichelle Slack / Diane Locke vs Leah Leal / Sid Utsey6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesEllen Sharan / Angel Garrett vs Ann Osten / Lisa Zanglin6-7, 7-6, 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 standings2 teams · 7.5 Combo Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Wynlakes Skier3072566
2Wynlakes Montgomery03271496

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 3.47 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.

3.90
Michelle Slack
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.87
Sandra Putz
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.65
Darlene Skier
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.55
Diane Locke
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.28
Angel Garrett
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.24
Sueanne Reynolds
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.24
Ellen Sharan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.03
Tammy Hayes
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Linda Ward
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.

Ellen Sharan + Darlene Skier4452% games+11.3% vs expected
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.

Michelle Slack
32W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%75%25%
3.90
Sandra Putz
8W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.87
4
Darlene Skier
17W–15L career · 3 lines in 2026
13%86%1%
3.65
3.5
Diane Locke
39W–18L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.55
3.5
Angel Garrett
23W–16L career · 1 line in 2026
2%92%6%
3.28
Sueanne Reynolds
24W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.24
Ellen Sharan
14W–19L career · 1 line in 2026
97%3%<1%
3.24
Tammy Hayes
9W–18L career · 3 lines in 2026
41%59%<1%
3.03
Linda Ward
10W–0L 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.