Teams

Goldman (65+ 8.0W)

2025 Adult 65 & Over · Women 8.0

11 players · average NTRP 4.00 / ST. LOUIS

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-05-26vs STL/Harrison/Woodard (65 8.0)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesKelly Yates / Deborah Washburn vs Denise Inman / Felice Rolnick1-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesNorma Feldman / Barbara Eversole vs Lorrie Crossett / Jana Goeke4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesKathleen Odegard / Florence Streeter vs Linda Woodard / Cynthia Harrison6-7, 4-4
2025-05-23vs STL/Harrison/Woodard (65 8.0)Won 21
L#1 DoublesFlorence Streeter / Kathleen Odegard vs Rose Luh / Sherry O'Connell1-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesVictoria Wright / Norma Feldman vs Linda Woodard / Denise Inman6-2, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKelly Yates / Deborah Washburn vs Felice Rolnick / Marla Lowes6-3, 4-4, 1-0
2025-05-20vs STL/Harrison/Woodard (65 8.0)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesDeborah Washburn / Robin Shiras-Cody vs Denise Inman / Felice Rolnick1-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesNorma Feldman / Victoria Wright vs Cynthia Harrison / Lisa Lamb7-5, 4-4
L#3 DoublesBarbara Eversole / Kelly Yates vs Jana Goeke / Lorrie Crossett6-7, 3-6
2025-05-16vs STL/Harrison/Woodard (65 8.0)Won 30
W#1 DoublesVictoria Wright / Norma Feldman vs Rose Luh / Judy McGaugh6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDale Schneider / Deborah Washburn vs Linda Woodard / Cynthia Harrison7-6, 5-3
W#3 DoublesBarbara Eversole / Kelly Yates vs Lisa Lamb / Felice Rolnick6-4, 7-5
2025-05-13vs STL/Harrison/Woodard (65 8.0)Won 21
W#1 DoublesVictoria Wright / Norma Feldman vs Lorrie Crossett / Jana Goeke3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesFlorence Streeter / Robin Shiras-Cody vs Cynthia Harrison / Linda Woodard4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesDale Schneider / Deborah Washburn vs Marla Lowes / Judy Frain6-1, 6-2
2025-05-09vs STL/Harrison/Woodard (65 8.0)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesDeborah Washburn / Kate Kleiber vs Denise Inman / Felice Rolnick2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesKathleen Odegard / Norma Feldman vs Lorrie Crossett / Judy McGaugh3-6, 4-5
L#3 DoublesBarbara Eversole / Kelly Yates vs Lisa Lamb / Cynthia Harrison5-7, 3-5
2025-05-06vs STL/Harrison/Woodard (65 8.0)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesFlorence Streeter / Kathleen Odegard vs Linda Woodard / Denise Inman6-1, 3-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesKelly Yates / Barbara Eversole vs Sherry O'Connell / Rose Luh6-2, 5-3
L#3 DoublesNorma Feldman / Robin Shiras-Cody vs Lisa Lamb / Cynthia Harrison4-6, 5-5
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 · Women 8.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1STL/Harrison/Woodard (65 8.0)4312918190
2Goldman (65+ 8.0W)3491224202

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 3.47 estimated across 6 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.

3.67
Deborah Washburn
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.65
Barbara Eversole
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.48
Dale Schneider
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.46
Robin Shiras-Cody
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.31
Kathleen Odegard
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.22
Norma Feldman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 42% · published
Dianne Goldmann
published
Florence Streeter
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Kate Kleiber
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Kelly Yates
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published
Victoria Wright
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.

Barbara Eversole + Kelly Yates391261% games+5.1% vs expected
Deborah Washburn + Barbara Eversole7164% games+3.3% vs expected
Deborah Washburn + Kelly Yates4454% games+2.0% vs expected
Deborah Washburn + Dianne Goldmann101249% games−1.0% vs expected
Barbara Eversole + Dianne Goldmann9650% games−4.3% vs expected
Dianne Goldmann + Kelly Yates4157% gamesnot enough data
Kate Kleiber + Norma Feldman314 matchesnot enough data
Kathleen Odegard + Florence Streeter033 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
Deborah Washburn
100W–98L career · 6 lines in 2025
12%88%1%
3.67
4
Barbara Eversole
94W–46L career · 5 lines in 2025
13%86%1%
3.65
4
Dale Schneider
17W–32L career · 2 lines in 2025
57%43%<1%
3.48
Robin Shiras-Cody
143W–134L career · 3 lines in 2025
61%39%<1%
3.46
Kathleen Odegard
49W–66L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.31
Norma Feldman
184W–175L career · 12 lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
Dianne Goldmann
60W–70L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Florence Streeter
170W–93L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kate Kleiber
53W–50L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Kelly Yates
91W–58L career · 9 lines in 2025
not enough data
Victoria Wright
13W–10L career · no lines in 2025
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.