Teams

BRTC:Bass River:Ciccone/Connors

2026 EMA Adult 55 & Over Women · 7.0 Women

15 players · average NTRP 3.50 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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
2026-07-20vs SFT:Spark:SidemanLost 02
L#1 DoublesJudy Hoyle / Elizabeth Roberts vs Mary D'Aoust / Kelly O'Connor4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesJeanette Bybee / Catherine Felton vs Tracy Salvi / Laurie Fiorilla6-7, 1-5
W#1 DoublesHolly Gamber / Amy DeSimone vs Maria Dasilva / Jody Lannan4-6, 6-0, 1-0
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Roberts / Kelly Heney vs Bridget MacMillan / Leslie LeVan2-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesPam Ciccone / Laura Knearem vs Janet Platania / Kathleen Smith3-6, 2-6
2026-06-15vs SFT:Spark:SidemanWon 20
W#2 DoublesHolly Gamber / Amy DeSimone vs Debora Lunt / Mary D'Aoust6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesDebbie Phillips / Catherine Felton vs Tracy Salvi / Janet Smith6-3, 7-6
L#1 DoublesUna Nimhurchu-Dennehy / Karen O'Neil vs Maria Dasilva / Jody Lannan4-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesPam Ciccone / Judy Hoyle vs Wendy Bacheller / Kathleen Kastrinelis3-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesJeanette Bybee / Debbie Phillips vs Bridget MacMillan / Kathleen Smith4-6, 5-7
L#1 DoublesUna Nimhurchu-Dennehy / Elizabeth Roberts vs Wendy Bacheller / Christina Sollecito3-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJeanette Bybee / Laura Knearem vs Dena Dehullu / Leslie LeVan5-7, 4-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSandra Lakeman / Karen O'Neil vs Janet Platania / Paula Bishop7-6, 4-2
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 standings15 teams · 7.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SFT:Spark:Sideman057819139
2BRTC:Bass River:Ciccone/Connors0551021145
3CED:Causing A Racquet:Platania/Bishop0612615130
4W109:Sweet Shots:Phillips/Partello0818615164
5WESF:Westfit:Wolf/Johnson0819517181
6SSY:South Shore:Gilmore/Baker08141023187
7WESF:Set2Play:Weisenbloom/Mateeva08121226205
8SHR:Shrewsbury:Pulnik0891532235
9NETC:Alley Cats:Vaugh/Brown08111333233
10WESB:Western Tennis Sisters:Nichols/June0891534232
11WEY:Weymouth:Gehrlein0842044276
12LFW:Longfellow Legends:Kottler0918927216
13PETC:Packer EllisTC:Riccio09131432261
14WOB:Woburn:Borelli/Gianino09121535271
15WOB:Aced to Perfection:Roy09111635262

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 3.26 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.

3.63
Holly Gamber
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.35
Una Nimhurchu-Dennehy
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.26
Kelly Heney
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Catherine Felton
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Debbie Phillips
published 3.5
Elizabeth Roberts
published 3.5
3.24
Judy Hoyle
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.05
Jeanette Bybee
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.03
Karen O'Neil
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Amy DeSimone
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
Laura Knearem
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Marjorie Robb
published
Pam Ciccone
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Sandra Lakeman
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Tracey Smith
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.

Karen O'Neil + Pam Ciccone5156% games+3.3% vs expected
Karen O'Neil + Una Nimhurchu-Dennehy4651% games+3.1% vs expected
Judy Hoyle + Pam Ciccone5546% games−4.4% vs expected
Una Nimhurchu-Dennehy + Tracey Smith21239% games−6.0% vs expected
Catherine Felton + Laura Knearem3252% gamesnot enough data
Judy Hoyle + Karen O'Neil224 matchesnot enough data
Sandra Lakeman + Laura Knearem224 matchesnot enough data
Una Nimhurchu-Dennehy + Holly Gamber314 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
Holly Gamber
39W–38L career · 6 lines in 2026
15%85%<1%
3.63
Una Nimhurchu-Dennehy
71W–60L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%87%13%
3.35
Kelly Heney
15W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
97%3%<1%
3.26
3.5
Catherine Felton
11W–11L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Debbie Phillips
7W–6L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Elizabeth Roberts
5W–8L career · type A · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Judy Hoyle
77W–76L career · 2 lines in 2026
3%94%2%
3.24
Jeanette Bybee
35W–57L career · 3 lines in 2026
35%65%<1%
3.05
Karen O'Neil
22W–28L career · 2 lines in 2026
41%59%<1%
3.03
3
Amy DeSimone
5W–4L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Laura Knearem
23W–48L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Marjorie Robb
7W–15L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Pam Ciccone
26W–30L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sandra Lakeman
18W–31L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Tracey Smith
2W–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.