Teams

NE/Holbrook/40&Over4.0W

2023 Neb. Adult 40&Over · 4.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 4.00 / NEBRASKA

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 →
Schedule6 played
2023-02-26vs HazelriggWon 31
W#1 DoublesBeth Stiles / Diane Porter vs Shelly Grote / Anne Heard6-1, 6-4
W#1 SinglesJolene Johnson vs Noelle Wegiel6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesMaxine Martin / Elizabeth Flood vs Fae Sterba / Holly Christoffels3-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesJennifer Rich / Lee Cooney vs Denise Hazelrigg / Cheryl Schmidt6-3, 6-3
2023-02-19vs Harrison/TongWon 31
W#1 DoublesBeth Stiles / Kim Spurgeon vs Debra Adams / Karen Andresen6-4, 6-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesJennifer Lindner vs Julie Seevers6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDiane Porter / Julia Elkin vs Elizabeth Pusic / Julie Hewett6-3, 6-4
L#3 DoublesHeather Blumel / Marcia Holbrook vs Anne Olsen / Sandra Zebrowski2-6, 4-6
2023-02-05vs Sassy StringsWon 30
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Flood / Heather Blumel vs Karen Jennings / Shelly Bates6-0, 6-3
W#2 DoublesDiane Porter / Cathy Fluckey vs Patti Tobia / Denise Johnson7-5, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJill Irwin / Jolene Johnson vs Jacquie Dierks / Michelle Muirhead7-6, 7-5
2023-01-29vs HazelriggWon 21
W#1 DoublesJennifer Lindner / Jolene Johnson vs Anne Heard / Shelly Grote6-1, 7-5
L#2 DoublesJennifer Rich / Kim Spurgeon vs Denise Hazelrigg / Leeann Esch1-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#3 DoublesLee Cooney / Heather Blumel vs Patricia Wrich / Cheryl Schmidt6-1, 6-1
2023-01-22vs Harrison/TongLost 13
L#1 DoublesJulia Elkin / Cathy Fluckey vs Julie Seevers / Wei Tong7-6, 4-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesJolene Johnson vs Liz Clark6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesJill Irwin / Marcia Holbrook vs Debra Adams / Karen Andresen3-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesMaxine Martin / Lisa Thomas vs Sandra Zebrowski / Anne Olsen0-6, 1-6
2023-01-15vs Sassy StringsWon 40
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Flood / Heather Blumel vs Shelly Bates / Denise Johnson6-1, 6-3
W#1 SinglesJennifer Lindner vs Liz Sambol6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesLee Cooney / Jennifer Rich vs Tammie Kennedy / Susie Weberg6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesKim Spurgeon / Beth Stiles vs Lynne Martin / Natalie Simmonds6-4, 6-4
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 standings3 teams · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NE/Holbrook/40&Over4.0W5118614182
2Harrison/Tong4215921190
3Brinkman43131531264

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 3.50 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.

Diane Porter
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.74
Jennifer Rich
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.68
Cathy Fluckey
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.64
Jolene Johnson
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.57
Julia Elkin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.56
Kim Spurgeon
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.49
Beth Stiles
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.48
Jennifer Lindner
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.45
Jill Irwin
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.43
Elizabeth Flood
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.42
Heather Blumel
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.04
Maxine Martin
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Lee Cooney
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Marcia Holbrook
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 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.

Beth Stiles + Julia Elkin10266% games+10.6% vs expected
Heather Blumel + Elizabeth Flood21658% games+8.5% vs expected
Jill Irwin + Julia Elkin4457% games+8.3% vs expected
Jolene Johnson + Jennifer Lindner7066% games+7.9% vs expected
Jennifer Rich + Lee Cooney12263% games+7.2% vs expected
Cathy Fluckey + Julia Elkin12366% games+7.0% vs expected
Beth Stiles + Maxine Martin6551% games+4.2% vs expected
Beth Stiles + Kim Spurgeon12455% games+1.7% vs expected
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
Diane Porter
42W–31L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Jennifer Rich
82W–61L career · 3 lines in 2023
97%3%<1%
3.74
4
Cathy Fluckey
65W–34L career · 2 lines in 2023
9%89%1%
3.68
Jolene Johnson
114W–65L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%17%83%
3.64
Julia Elkin
87W–61L career · 2 lines in 2023
30%70%<1%
3.57
Kim Spurgeon
57W–34L career · 8 lines in 2023
35%65%<1%
3.56
4
Beth Stiles
79W–60L career · 3 lines in 2023
54%46%<1%
3.49
Jennifer Lindner
55W–52L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%<1%>99%
3.48
Jill Irwin
50W–34L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%<1%>99%
3.45
Elizabeth Flood
72W–40L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%70%30%
3.43
Heather Blumel
147W–158L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%71%29%
3.42
Maxine Martin
45W–47L career · 2 lines in 2023
38%62%<1%
3.04
Lee Cooney
107W–130L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Marcia Holbrook
25W–40L career · 2 lines in 2023
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.