Teams

SH - Oakley

2026 Mixed 40 & Over 3.0 - 4.5 · 4.0 Adult 40 Mixed

8 players · average NTRP 4.00 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-07-16vs Jones 4.0 MixedWon 20
W#1 DoublesDavid Bachofer / Cynthia Fennel vs Edwin Garner Jr / Donna Garner6-1, 7-6
W#2 DoublesChad Oakley / Valerie Oakley vs Sandra Kirk / Ronny Jones6-2, 6-2
2026-07-12vs Jones 4.0 MixedWon 20
W#1 DoublesValerie Oakley / Chad Oakley vs Edwin Garner Jr / Donna Garner6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesSharon Garrison / Kevin Strickland vs Tamela Traglia / Ronny Jones6-1, 6-3
2026-07-09vs Jones 4.0 MixedWon 20
W#1 DoublesDavid Bachofer / Sharon Garrison vs Eugene Schrock / Sandra Kirk6-0, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCaitlin Barker / Neal Barker vs Aubrey Miree / Melissa Young6-2, 7-5
2026-06-29vs Jones 4.0 MixedWon 20
W#1 DoublesClaire Mitchell / David Bachofer vs Tamela Traglia / Eugene Schrock6-7, 6-1, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCynthia Fennel / Kevin Strickland vs Aubrey Miree / Melissa Young3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2026-06-18vs Jones 4.0 MixedWon 30
W#1 DoublesChad Oakley / Cynthia Fennel vs Tamela Traglia / Aubrey Miree6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesDavid Bachofer / Claire Mitchell vs Edwin Garner Jr / Donna Garner6-7, 6-1, 1-0
W#3 DoublesNeal Barker / Caitlin Barker vs Ronny Jones / Sandra Kirk6-0, 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 standings2 teams · 4.0 Adult 40 Mixed
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SH - Oakley50150363
2Jones 4.0 Mixed0501530182

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 3.46 estimated across 8 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.

3.74
David Bachofer
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.70
Caitlin Barker
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.65
Sharon Garrison
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.63
Chad Oakley
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.53
Cynthia Fennel
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.22
Kevin Strickland
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.16
Neal Barker
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.04
Valerie Oakley
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
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
David Bachofer
8W–0L career · 4 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.74
4
Caitlin Barker
11W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.70
Sharon Garrison
103W–27L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.65
4
Chad Oakley
13W–0L career · 3 lines in 2026
18%82%<1%
3.63
4
Cynthia Fennel
52W–23L career · 3 lines in 2026
41%59%<1%
3.53
Kevin Strickland
17W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%5%95%
3.22
Neal Barker
7W–0L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%12%88%
3.16
Valerie Oakley
38W–28L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%39%61%
3.04

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.