Teams

EUnderwood (Russell)

2026 Adult 55 & Over League · 55 & Over Adult 3.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.12 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-04-24vs KPredmore (Jeff Adams)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesMary Wegener / Linda Glass vs Paula Donoghue / Donna Musante1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJanet Fiedor / Terri Hood vs Carol Prince / Tammy Sharp5-7, 4-6
L#3 DoublesLeigh Ingram / Michele Collins vs Tisa Mullis / Lori Holcombe2-6, 0-6
2026-04-17vs BBrown (Park Crossing)Won 21
L#1 DoublesLeigh Ingram / Mary Wegener vs Jinna Harmon / Rhonda Cantrell3-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesJanet Fiedor / Sharon Norman vs Marion Mande / Karla Hollowell7-5, 6-0
W#3 DoublesEllen Underwood / Terri Hood vs Cherie Bouchon / Diane Harrington6-4, 2-6, 1-0
2026-04-10vs LWallace/BHoff (Carmel)Won 20
W#1 DoublesTerri Hood / Sharon Norman vs Susan Taylor / Mary White6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLeigh Ingram / Mary Wegener vs Mary Ruth Faulkner / Tammy Langdon7-6, 7-6
2026-04-03vs BLothe/LLober (Mason Wallace)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesDebbie Barnes / Leigh Ingram vs Linda Lober / Karen Olson6-2, 6-7, 0-1
L#2 DoublesTerri Hood / Janet Fiedor vs Lisa Dunning / Kyna Savedge6-4, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesSharon Norman / Ellen Underwood vs Virginia Borkey / Rebecca Lothe6-0, 6-2
2026-03-27vs JSanderson (OPRC)Won 30
W#1 DoublesLeigh Ingram / Debbie Barnes vs Kendra May / Vibha Shankar6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJanet Fiedor / Mary Wegener vs Jean Sanderson / Elizabeth Neligan7-6, 6-0
W#3 DoublesLinda Glass / Michele Collins vs Janet Newton / Janice Abluton6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2026-03-20vs SAsby/LSelland (Sardis)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesSharon Norman / Heather Gwaltney vs Lynn Selland / Sarah Asby2-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesEllen Underwood / Janet Fiedor vs Tracy Graham / Sharon Storck5-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesLeigh Ingram / Mary Wegener vs Anne Wilson / Anne Sadler1-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-03-13vs NMurphy (WSRC)Won 30
W#1 DoublesJanet Fiedor / Terri Hood vs Karen Moran / Kelli Massaro6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesLinda Glass / Michele Collins vs Jacqui Gentile / Tracy Lacroix6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesKate Palanica / Ellen Underwood vs Allyson Dantino / Kim Bivens6-1, 6-1
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 standings19 teams · 55 & Over Adult 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1KPredmore (Jeff Adams)70201278
2SAsby/LSelland (Sardis)6118311136
3MGlover (Russell)6115615146
4LO'Shea (Southampton)6114719179
5JGieker (Lifetime)6217716151
6TWard (FCC)5212921186
7DSenay (WSRC)53141022197
8EUnderwood (Russell)4312920173
9MDevendorf (Blakeney)44111331230
10KLucas (Matthews)3310821174
11SAdditon (Rolling Hills Country Club)34101125199
12KHargett (Palisades)3481327198
13BLothe/LLober (Mason Wallace)3481329215
14KHammack/LMaloney (OPRC)35111329230
15TWalker (Carmel)25101126205
16JSanderson (OPRC)2561533230
17TSetzer (WSRC)1661533230
18GMurrell/TEvans (Charlotte Tennis)1641736240
19LWallace/BHoff (Carmel)1631836233

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 3.07 estimated across 9 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.

3.25
Terri Hood
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.20
Kate Palanica
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.20
Janet Fiedor
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
3.14
Sharon Norman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.07
Ellen Underwood
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
3.05
Linda Glass
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.02
Leigh Ingram
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.90
Heather Gwaltney
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.80
Mary Wegener
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
Kathy Fister
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.

Mary Wegener + Leigh Ingram3840% gamesnot enough data
Sharon Norman + Leigh Ingram2346% gamesnot enough data
Janet Fiedor + Terri Hood134 matchesnot enough data
Sharon Norman + Terri Hood303 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.

Terri Hood
8W–9L career · 5 lines in 2026
3%95%3%
3.25
Kate Palanica
9W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
6%93%1%
3.20
Janet Fiedor
8W–7L career · 6 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
3.20
Sharon Norman
8W–9L career · 4 lines in 2026
14%86%<1%
3.14
3
Ellen Underwood
6W–12L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%30%70%
3.07
Linda Glass
4W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
34%66%<1%
3.05
3.5
Leigh Ingram
29W–48L career · 6 lines in 2026
43%57%<1%
3.02
3
Heather Gwaltney
2W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%78%22%
2.90
3
Mary Wegener
15W–47L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%93%6%
2.80
Kathy Fister
0W–1L 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.