Teams

Lo.Hall40A

2025 Capital Adult 40 & Over · 4.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.57 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-05-09vs Ma.May40ALost 02
L#1 DoublesKimberly Walker / Laurie Reiss vs Lisa ONeill / Heather Mittag3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesLisa Kempf / Anna Jane Franklin vs Shannon Powell / Stacy Rank0-6, 1-6
2025-04-24vs Al.Crumpler40ALost 01
L#2 DoublesLisa Kempf / Jessica Phillips vs Kate Whitney / Joanna Brooks3-6, 1-6
2025-04-21vs Ly.Manweiler40ALost 01
L#2 DoublesLisa Kempf / Jessica Phillips vs Carol Muth / Sandra Merkel DeJames6-0, 3-6, 0-1
2025-03-24Won 10
W#1 DoublesRobin Sealey / Kimberly Walker vs Daphne Driscoll / Wendy Brooker4-6, 6-2, 1-0
2025-03-20vs Am.Williams40AWon 10
W#2 DoublesLaurie Reiss / Robin Sealey vs Meredith Barnette / Elisabeth Sanchez6-4, 6-7, 1-0
2025-03-17vs Ka.Conley40AWon 10
W#3 DoublesLaura Davidson / Marina Barthalmus vs Sharon Foster / Holli Swenson6-2, 6-2
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 standings for 4.0 Women have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.51 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.

3.82
Christina Jenkins
published 3.5
3.76
Celeste Ramsey
published 4
3.74
Lorraine Hall
published
3.68
Jane Hunter
published
3.43
Anna Jane Franklin
published 3.5
3.38
Lisa Kempf
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.36
Robin Sealey
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.32
Marina Barthalmus
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.15
Laurie Reiss
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published 3.5
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.

Lisa Kempf + Laurie Reiss7456% games+5.2% vs expected
Robin Sealey + Lisa Kempf8752% games−0.2% vs expected
Laurie Reiss + Marina Barthalmus71049% games−1.5% vs expected
Lisa Kempf + Marina Barthalmus4647% games−5.3% vs expected
Robin Sealey + Jane Hunter123 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.

3.5
Christina Jenkins
34W–10L career · no lines in 2025
<1%1%99%
3.82
4
Celeste Ramsey
3W–3L career · no lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.76
Lorraine Hall
50W–17L career · no lines in 2025
<1%5%95%
3.74
Jane Hunter
16W–12L career · no lines in 2025
10%89%1%
3.68
3.5
Anna Jane Franklin
22W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
3.43
3.5
Lisa Kempf
365W–300L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
3.38
3.5
Robin Sealey
64W–63L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%84%16%
3.36
3.5
Marina Barthalmus
218W–213L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Laurie Reiss
234W–202L career · 7 lines in 2025
14%86%1%
3.15

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.