Teams

ESTC-Newton

2022 ADULT 65 & Over · 8.0 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.83 / SOUTHERN OREGON

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 →
Schedule4 played
2022-05-22vs ATFC-PattonSplit 11
W#2 DoublesAndrea Newton / Sarah Wiggins vs Ellen Miller / Sue McCandless6-3, 6-2
L#3 DoublesNancy Bishop / Kelley Carpenter vs Kate McInerny / Nancy Walz6-4, 2-6, 0-1
2022-05-21vs ATFC-PattonWon 20
W#1 DoublesIsabel Kelly / Sarah Wiggins vs Sue Sullivan / Gail Patton6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesAndrea Newton / Kelley Carpenter vs Kate McInerny / Nancy Walz6-3, 6-4
2022-05-15vs ATFC-PattonWon 30
W#1 DoublesAndrea Newton / Kelley Carpenter vs Kate McInerny / Nancy Walz6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesSarah Wiggins / Isabel Kelly vs Judy Israel / Gail Patton6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesDarla Farstvedt / Karla Farber vs Ellen Miller / Leslie Zauher6-2, 6-1
2022-05-14vs ATFC-PattonWon 21
W#1 DoublesAndrea Newton / Kelley Carpenter vs Gail Patton / Judy Israel3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesSarah Wiggins / Isabel Kelly vs Leslie Zauher / Ellen Miller7-5, 6-2
L#3 DoublesDarla Farstvedt / Karla Farber vs Kate McInerny / Nancy Walz3-6, 6-4, 0-1
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 · 8.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1ESTC-Newton3193890
2ATFC-Patton133920130

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 3 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.

Andrea Newton
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.66
Sarah Wiggins
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.55
Isabel Kelly
published 4
3.17
Darla Farstvedt
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Deanna Knode
published
Karla Farber
published
Kelley Carpenter
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · 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.

Sarah Wiggins + Isabel Kelly12361% gamesnot enough data
Andrea Newton + Kelley Carpenter8353% gamesnot enough data
Darla Farstvedt + Karla Farber3646% gamesnot enough data
Andrea Newton + Sarah Wiggins3260% gamesnot 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
Andrea Newton
15W–11L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sarah Wiggins
45W–27L career · 4 lines in 2022
10%89%<1%
3.66
4
Isabel Kelly
16W–11L career · no lines in 2022
34%66%<1%
3.55
3.5
Darla Farstvedt
18W–33L career · 2 lines in 2022
9%90%1%
3.17
Deanna Knode
2W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Karla Farber
32W–14L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Kelley Carpenter
14W–14L career · 4 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.