Teams

EE:String Theory:Gale/Demas

2024 VT Adult 65 & Over Women · 7.0 Adult 65 & Over Women Flight 1

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VERMONT

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2024-08-03vs OC:Foulk/JacksonLost 03
L#1 DoublesCarol Bouyea / Lisa Strausser vs Jennifer Dembinski / Joan Holcombe2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesLiz Demas / Ann Laramee vs Rebecca Foulk / Joan Toland6-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJanis Bark / Marjorie Gale vs Elaine Meek / Judy Wild7-6, 3-6, 0-1
2024-07-20vs OC:Foulk/JacksonWon 30
W#1 DoublesAnn Laramee / Linda Morgan-Yatzor vs Judy Wild / Priscilla Geoghegan6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesJanis Bark / Martha Small vs Joan Toland / Carole McNamee6-4, 6-5
W#3 DoublesDawn Bugbee / Lynn Bursell vs Fe Ramos / Joan Holcombe6-4, 6-3
2024-06-30vs OC:Foulk/JacksonWon 21
L#1 DoublesCarol Bouyea / Marjorie Gale vs Jennifer Dembinski / Judith Jackson2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesLinda Morgan-Yatzor / Patricia Sabalis vs Fe Ramos / Kathy Yost6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesLiz Demas / Martha Small vs Carole McNamee / Elaine Meek6-3, 7-6
2024-06-22vs OC:Foulk/JacksonWon 30
W#1 DoublesAnn Laramee / Patricia Sabalis vs Jennifer Dembinski / Judith Jackson6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesCarol Bouyea / Marjorie Gale vs Joan Holcombe / Priscilla Geoghegan6-3, 6-2
W#3 DoublesDawn Bugbee / Lynn Bursell vs Rebecca Foulk / Kathy Yost6-1, 4-6, 1-0
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 · 7.0 Adult 65 & Over Women Flight 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1EE:String Theory:Gale/Demas31849106
2OC:Foulk/Jackson134817121

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 3.11 estimated across 5 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.

3.32
Lisa Strausser
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Ann Laramee
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.15
Martha Small
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.11
Linda Morgan-Yatzor
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.08
Carol Bouyea
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.88
Dawn Bugbee
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Janis Bark
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Liz Demas
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Lynn Bursell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Marjorie Gale
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Patricia Sabalis
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · 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.

Linda Morgan-Yatzor + Lynn Bursell4547% gamesnot enough data
Lisa Strausser + Carol Bouyea1435% gamesnot enough data
Liz Demas + Lynn Bursell2343% gamesnot enough data
Linda Morgan-Yatzor + Dawn Bugbee0532% gamesnot enough data
Liz Demas + Linda Morgan-Yatzor044 matchesnot enough data
Patricia Sabalis + Ann Laramee224 matchesnot enough data
Marjorie Gale + Carol Bouyea123 matchesnot enough data
Carol Bouyea + Patricia Sabalis213 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.

Lisa Strausser
64W–50L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Ann Laramee
13W–14L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Martha Small
41W–42L career · 2 lines in 2024
13%86%1%
3.15
Linda Morgan-Yatzor
46W–68L career · 3 lines in 2024
>99%<1%<1%
3.11
3.5
Carol Bouyea
22W–35L career · 3 lines in 2024
28%72%<1%
3.08
3.5
Dawn Bugbee
13W–22L career · 2 lines in 2024
80%20%<1%
2.88
Janis Bark
42W–71L career · 5 lines in 2024
not enough data
Liz Demas
16W–29L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Lynn Bursell
32W–37L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Marjorie Gale
7W–14L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Patricia Sabalis
13W–14L career · 5 lines in 2024
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.