Teams

Richmond

2022 WI Other · 2022 WI Adult 55+ 7.0 Mixed Weekend Warrior

9 players · average NTRP 3.50 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2022-10-09vs ArmitageLost 12
L#1 DoublesPatricia Hanz / David Feiss vs Tom Leggett / Theresa Palasota3-8
W#2 DoublesLinda Match / Rick O'Connor vs John Cao / Karelyn Hopkins8-1
L#3 DoublesCarrie Buri / Jack Buri vs Lynn Armitage / Michael Finnegan1-8
2022-10-09vs SiehoffWon 30
W#1 DoublesLinda Match / Rick O'Connor vs Robin Siehoff / Rob Martin8-1
W#2 DoublesMaurice Russell / Kathryn Tweet vs James Lambiris / Melanie Kuzmanovic8-5
W#3 DoublesRichard Vincent / Carrie Buri vs Paul Lickteig / PATRICIA EICHTEN8-5
2022-10-09vs HammondWon 21
L#1 DoublesLinda Match / Richard Vincent vs David Gahagan / Zita Wenda6-8
W#2 DoublesDavid Feiss / Patricia Hanz vs Kevin Struck / Christine Frank8-5
W#3 DoublesMaurice Russell / Kathryn Tweet vs Todd Hammond / Amy Buege8-5
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 standings4 teams · 2022 WI Adult 55+ 7.0 Mixed Weekend Warrior
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Hammond2163356
2Richmond2163346
3Armitage2154451
4Siehoff0318872

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 3.30 estimated across 4 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.

3.63
Maurice Russell
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.51
David Feiss
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.14
Kathryn Tweet
usually #3 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
2.92
Carrie Buri
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Amy Richmond
published
Linda Match
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Patricia Hanz
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Richard Vincent
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Rick O'Connor
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Maurice Russell + Kathryn Tweet404 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.

Maurice Russell
55W–60L career · 2 lines in 2022
17%83%<1%
3.63
4
David Feiss
21W–23L career · 2 lines in 2022
48%52%<1%
3.51
3.5
Kathryn Tweet
91W–61L career · 7 lines in 2022
14%86%<1%
3.14
3
Carrie Buri
34W–60L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%73%27%
2.92
Amy Richmond
42W–33L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Linda Match
75W–29L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Patricia Hanz
12W–21L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Richard Vincent
3W–5L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Rick O'Connor
7W–3L career · 2 lines in 2022
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.