Teams

RTC ALBUS

2025 FW Ladies 55 & Over winter · Fri 8.0 Ladies

14 players · average NTRP 4.00 / TEXAS

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 →
Schedule2 played
2025-02-14vs TCU AVERYWon 20
W#1 DoublesMary Lynn Satur / Lori Sciremammano vs Pam Gold / Sally Joy7-5, 6-4
W#2 DoublesJan McKean / Gayle van Leeuwen vs DelRae Schickedanz / Trish Huckabay4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-01-31vs RTC HUDNALLWon 21
W#1 DoublesCharean Williams / Mary Duffy vs Tracy Groves / Jennifer McNamara7-6, 6-3
W#2 DoublesAngela James / Pamela Kvale vs Gayla Collins / Diane Cauwels6-0, 6-2
L#3 DoublesKimberly Grogan / Mary Gardiner vs Patti Hart / Lynn Jumper4-6, 6-7
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 Fri 8.0 Ladies 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 3.70 estimated across 11 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.

3.85
Kimberly Grogan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.83
Mary Duffy
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.82
Charean Williams
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.77
Pamela Kvale
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.73
Mary Lynn Satur
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.70
Caroline Bishop
published 4
3.68
Mary Gardiner
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.67
Teresa Albus
published
3.60
Angela James
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.59
Lori Sciremammano
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.50
Jan McKean
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
Gayle van Leeuwen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Pam Wiseman
published
Samantha McCartan
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.

Pamela Kvale + Kimberly Grogan11161% games+13.5% vs expected
Teresa Albus + Kimberly Grogan3948% games+2.5% vs expected
Mary Duffy + Charean Williams9065% games−0.8% vs expected
Mary Lynn Satur + Kimberly Grogan224 matchesnot enough data
Lori Sciremammano + Caroline Bishop134 matchesnot enough data
Pamela Kvale + Caroline Bishop123 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.

Kimberly Grogan
54W–40L career · 1 line in 2025
1%85%14%
3.85
Mary Duffy
20W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
1%88%11%
3.83
4
Charean Williams
19W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
1%89%10%
3.82
Pamela Kvale
37W–32L career · 1 line in 2025
3%92%5%
3.77
Mary Lynn Satur
17W–12L career · 1 line in 2025
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Caroline Bishop
17W–17L career · no lines in 2025
8%90%1%
3.70
Mary Gardiner
13W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
10%89%1%
3.68
Teresa Albus
30W–22L career · no lines in 2025
11%88%1%
3.67
4
Angela James
16W–16L career · 1 line in 2025
24%76%<1%
3.60
Lori Sciremammano
8W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.59
Jan McKean
60W–17L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%51%49%
3.50
Gayle van Leeuwen
1W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Pam Wiseman
4W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Samantha McCartan
1W–3L 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.