Teams

NE/Winquest/55&over9.0W

2021 Neb. Adult 55&Over · 9.0 Adult Women

8 players · average NTRP 4.12 / NEBRASKA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2021-06-06vs WaltonSplit 11
L#1 DoublesAtsuko Christensen / Kim Spurgeon vs Kay Merkel / Linda Walton5-8
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Flood / Cathy Fluckey vs Shelly Bates / Fae Sterba8-2
2021-06-06vs WaltonWon 10
W#2 DoublesAtsuko Christensen / Kim Spurgeon vs Kay Merkel / Fae Sterba8-6
2021-06-06vs WaltonSplit 11
L#1 DoublesVictoria Leigh Glesmann / Mary Lou Winquest vs Katherine Hawkins / Susan Sloboth2-8
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Flood / Cathy Fluckey vs Kay Merkel / Fae Sterba8-3
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 · 9.0 Adult Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NE/Winquest/55&over9.0W3063336

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 3.84 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.

3.96
Atsuko Christensen
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.94
Deborah Zrubek
published 4.5
3.93
Janice Price
published
3.85
Cathy Fluckey
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.77
Victoria Leigh Glesmann
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.76
Elizabeth Flood
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.70
Kim Spurgeon
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Mary Lou Winquest
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Victoria Leigh Glesmann + Kim Spurgeon7154% games+0.7% vs expected
Deborah Zrubek + Janice Price331357% games+0.1% vs expected
Victoria Leigh Glesmann + Mary Lou Winquest10854% games−1.0% vs expected
Kim Spurgeon + Mary Lou Winquest6261% gamesnot enough data
Mary Lou Winquest + Atsuko Christensen3260% gamesnot enough data
Victoria Leigh Glesmann + Cathy Fluckey224 matchesnot enough data
Kim Spurgeon + Atsuko Christensen314 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.

4
Atsuko Christensen
75W–54L career · 7 lines in 2021
<1%64%36%
3.96
4.5
Deborah Zrubek
57W–28L career · no lines in 2021
67%33%<1%
3.94
Janice Price
79W–46L career · no lines in 2021
71%29%<1%
3.93
4
Cathy Fluckey
65W–36L career · 3 lines in 2021
<1%87%13%
3.85
Victoria Leigh Glesmann
38W–48L career · 1 line in 2021
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Elizabeth Flood
75W–40L career · 2 lines in 2021
2%95%3%
3.76
Kim Spurgeon
59W–36L career · 3 lines in 2021
6%93%1%
3.70
Mary Lou Winquest
26W–18L career · 1 line in 2021
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.