Teams

North Texas RC/Ross-Weber W4.0F

2026 DALLAS TENNIS N · A 18 & Over ADULT Fall W. Friday

16 players · average NTRP 3.88 / 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 →
Schedule5 played
2025-10-10vs High Point/Soldan W4.0FSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLara Tucci / Nora Olthof vs Jannine Soldan / Shailaja Malani4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesKaren Newby / Sonja Bocklage vs Judy Barbo / Gina Paterno Villalobos6-4, 6-4
2025-10-03vs SMU/Park W4.0FSplit 22
L#1 DoublesDoreen Thomas / Melissa Sipes vs Tory Redington-Chauza / Erin Koechel4-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesMary Feagin vs Lisa Donohoe2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesAmy Nickerson / Lara Tucci vs Erin Schreyer / Beth Park6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesRita Wilson / Yan Weber vs Barbara Forkel / Ellen Beren7-5, 6-2
2025-09-26Split 11
L#1 DoublesSarah Ross / Yan Weber vs Christie Smith / Sarah Wollitz2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesNora Olthof / Mary Feagin vs Michelle Buchanan / Rosalyn Luong6-1, 7-5
2025-09-19vs Greenhill/Nevelow W4.0FLost 03
L#1 DoublesLara Tucci / Sarah Ross vs Monique Black / Candice Ewing3-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesNora Olthof / Cindy Taylor vs Anne Bentley / Brittani Yoo1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesAna Jordan / Sonja Bocklage vs Cindy Pappous / Jenna Xiong1-6, 2-6
2025-09-05vs Samuell Grand/Roos-Oliver W4.0FLost 04
L#1 DoublesLara Tucci / Sandy Seaton vs Tricia Roos / Louise Bexley6-4, 4-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesYan Weber vs Shannon Hogan1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesMelissa Sipes / Ana Jordan vs Rochelle Watson / Meg Lohr4-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesKaren Newby / Sonja Bocklage vs Maria Hasbany / Jen Mulhern2-6, 2-6
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 standings14 teams · A 18 & Over ADULT Fall W. Friday
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Greenhill/Newberg-Schonwald W4.0F61181028219
2Greenhill/Nevelow W4.0F5116816185
3High Point/Soldan W4.0F4215921215
4SMU/Park W4.0F42121228226
5Jack Coleman/Smith-Bradley W4.0F42111329215
6DAC/Fellman W4.0F43181025237
7McKinney/Jacobs-Chapman W4.0F43151329247
8The Lakes TA/Buckalew-Criswell W4.0F33101430210
9Gleneagles/Wright-Shukis W4.0F34151330248
10Stonebriar CC/Woodson W4.0F2491532238
11High Point/Neal-Jenkins W4.0F2591939281
12DCC/Chilian W4.0F1571735245
13North Texas RC/Ross-Weber W4.0F1571735252
14Rockwall GAC/Hill W4.0F0671740265

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 3.57 estimated across 14 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.

3.82
Amy Nickerson
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
Cindy Taylor
published 4
3.71
Lara Tucci
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.68
Mary Feagin
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
3.67
Nora Olthof
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.66
Sandy Seaton
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
3.65
Karen Newby
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.60
Yan Weber
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.58
Sonja Bocklage
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.55
Doreen Thomas
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.52
Melissa Sipes
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.47
Ana Jordan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.42
Suzanne Kim
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.33
Louise Master
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published
3.31
April Richardson
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Rita Wilson
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 Feagin + Nora Olthof314 matchesnot enough data
Sandy Seaton + Doreen Thomas134 matchesnot enough data
Sonja Bocklage + Ana Jordan134 matchesnot enough data
Doreen Thomas + Lara Tucci134 matchesnot enough data
Sonja Bocklage + Karen Newby123 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.

4
Amy Nickerson
9W–16L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.82
4
Cindy Taylor
11W–15L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Lara Tucci
4W–7L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.71
Mary Feagin
4W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.68
Nora Olthof
6W–8L career · 3 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.67
Sandy Seaton
9W–21L career · 5 lines in 2026
12%87%1%
3.66
Karen Newby
9W–10L career · 5 lines in 2026
15%84%1%
3.65
Yan Weber
3W–8L career · 3 lines in 2026
23%76%<1%
3.60
Sonja Bocklage
18W–21L career · 3 lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
3.58
Doreen Thomas
9W–18L career · 5 lines in 2026
36%64%<1%
3.55
Melissa Sipes
4W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
43%57%<1%
3.52
4
Ana Jordan
2W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
60%40%<1%
3.47
Suzanne Kim
5W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
71%29%<1%
3.42
Louise Master
24W–11L career · 8 lines in 2026
1%87%12%
3.33
3.5
April Richardson
10W–11L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
Rita Wilson
12W–18L 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.