Teams

COLLIER/Gardner/Adult40&over4.0W

2025 Collier Adult 40 & Over Spring · 4.0 Adult 40 & Over - Women Sring

27 players · average NTRP 4.00 / REGION_7

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-05-15vs Pelican Marsh / BargerWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaryn Sardar / Nancy Harbert vs Kristen Catino / Gretchen Landolt6-3, 6-0
2025-04-29vs Pelican Marsh / BargerWon 10
W#2 DoublesNancy Harbert / Peggy Hogan vs Kristen Catino / Gretchen Landolt6-4, 7-6
2025-04-16vs Cambier / GustWon 10
W#1 DoublesNancy Harbert / Peggy Hogan vs Diana DeFulviis / Lisa Gust6-3, 6-3
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 standings for 4.0 Adult 40 & Over - Women Sring 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 3.81 estimated across 22 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.

4.20
Nada Pivcevic
published
4.06
Sandee Kozel
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
4.03
Christine Ragain
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
4.00
Tammy Finlinson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.95
Kimberly DiStefano
usually #1 Singles 56%, also #1 Doubles 22% · published 4
3.94
Chanel Chambers
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.92
Amy Gardner
published 4
3.88
Chrissy Rogers
published 4
3.88
Wendy Garber
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.84
Dawn Burt
published 4
3.81
Catherine Rigamer
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.81
Sara Munholland
published
3.77
KAREN MAJERCZAK
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.75
Michele Tesei
published
Beth Jones
published 4
3.74
Diana Pleeter
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.70
Susan Odonnell
published
3.65
Marie Shoaf
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.65
Melissa Bailey
published
3.61
Shannon Pirron
published
3.60
Candace Azad
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.53
Amanda Fowler
published 4
3.43
Lori Poulin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4
Karyn Sardar
published
Katie Lober
published
Nancy Harbert
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Peggy Hogan
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.

Dawn Burt + Sandee Kozel7164% games+8.1% vs expected
Wendy Garber + Marie Shoaf2355% games+7.2% vs expected
KAREN MAJERCZAK + Shannon Pirron6261% games+7.0% vs expected
Wendy Garber + Kimberly DiStefano7170% games+3.4% vs expected
Amy Gardner + Tammy Finlinson8658% games+2.4% vs expected
Candace Azad + Michele Tesei3250% games+0.4% vs expected
Diana Pleeter + Marie Shoaf221453% games−0.2% vs expected
Nancy Harbert + Karyn Sardar9162% 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.

Nada Pivcevic
11W–1L career · no lines in 2025
6%93%1%
4.20
4
Sandee Kozel
82W–27L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%33%67%
4.06
4
Christine Ragain
50W–25L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%40%60%
4.03
4
Tammy Finlinson
61W–28L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%50%50%
4.00
4
Kimberly DiStefano
162W–61L career · 9 lines in 2025
<1%64%36%
3.95
4
Chanel Chambers
202W–97L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%69%31%
3.94
4
Amy Gardner
14W–10L career · no lines in 2025
<1%72%28%
3.92
4
Chrissy Rogers
23W–11L career · no lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.88
Wendy Garber
128W–93L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.88
4
Dawn Burt
30W–15L career · no lines in 2025
<1%89%10%
3.84
4
Catherine Rigamer
75W–68L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%92%8%
3.81
Sara Munholland
9W–5L career · no lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.81
4
KAREN MAJERCZAK
160W–108L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.77
Michele Tesei
53W–25L career · no lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Beth Jones
4W–0L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Diana Pleeter
139W–84L career · 5 lines in 2025
3%94%2%
3.74
Susan Odonnell
13W–2L career · no lines in 2025
99%1%<1%
3.70
4
Marie Shoaf
160W–135L career · 6 lines in 2025
13%87%<1%
3.65
Melissa Bailey
14W–17L career · no lines in 2025
13%87%<1%
3.65
Shannon Pirron
56W–29L career · no lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.61
4
Candace Azad
132W–98L career · 6 lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
3.60
4
Amanda Fowler
4W–10L career · no lines in 2025
42%58%<1%
3.53
4
Lori Poulin
100W–117L career · 8 lines in 2025
70%30%<1%
3.43
Karyn Sardar
22W–7L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Katie Lober
1W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Nancy Harbert
148W–83L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Peggy Hogan
16W–7L career · no 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.