Teams

Tanis

2022 Neb. Adult 55&Over · 7.0 Adult Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NEBRASKA

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 →
Schedule8 played
2022-06-30vs JudernatzWon 20
W#1 DoublesHolly Connealy / Ann Kubat vs Joyce Schilke / Karen Crook6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesRenee Masching / Jennifer Storm vs Anna Judernatz / Jill Cochran6-0, 6-1
2022-06-25vs NE/Doghman/55&Over7.0WLost 12
L#1 DoublesRenee Masching / Jennifer Storm vs Kim Foral / Cynthia Workman2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesPatricia Buser / Diane Byrnes vs Mary Doghman / Debra Bigando2-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKarla Cassels / Anne Conlon vs Tammie Kennedy / Jacklyn McKeever4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2022-06-18vs Olson/HolkaWon 30
W#1 DoublesAnn Kubat / ANN TANIS vs Barbara Scribner / Diana Good6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesPatricia Buser / Diane Byrnes vs Julie Schmidt / Susan Messersmith6-3, 6-0
W#3 DoublesAnne Conlon / Nancy Watson vs Margaret Brockman / Cinda Curry6-2, 6-0
2022-06-16vs UffelmanWon 21
L#1 DoublesHolly Connealy / Ann Kubat vs Pam Boyle / Sherrie Manning6-7, 2-6
W#2 DoublesRenee Masching / Karla Cassels vs Sandra Batelaan / Deb Boehle6-3, 6-2
W#3 DoublesLeslie Slone / ANN TANIS vs DeAnne Printz / Melissa McCoy6-4, 7-6
2022-06-04vs JudernatzWon 30
W#1 DoublesKathy Peterson / Ann Kubat vs Rose Anania / Anna Judernatz6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesKarla Cassels / Anne Conlon vs Jill Cochran / Karol Streit6-7, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJennifer Storm / ANN TANIS vs Joyce Schilke / Karen Ralfs6-1, 6-2
2022-06-02vs NE/Doghman/55&Over7.0WWon 21
L#1 DoublesHolly Connealy / Ann Kubat vs Kim Foral / Cynthia Workman4-6, 6-1, 0-1
W#2 DoublesRenee Masching / ANN TANIS vs Denise Johnson / Linda Meuret4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKathy Peterson / Chris Shouse vs Mary Doghman / Debra Bigando6-4, 2-6, 1-0
2022-05-21vs Olson/HolkaWon 30
W#1 DoublesAnn Kubat / Holly Connealy vs Mary Pat Loos / Barbara Martin6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesANN TANIS / Leslie Slone vs Andrea Holka / Diana Good6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAnne Conlon / Nancy Watson vs Sue Olson / Margaret Brockman6-2, 6-0
2022-05-07vs UffelmanWon 21
L#1 DoublesJennifer Storm / Leslie Slone vs Pam Boyle / Debra Caudill2-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesKathy Peterson / Chris Shouse vs Sandra Batelaan / Deb Boehle4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesDiane Byrnes / Patricia Buser vs Melissa McCoy / Colleen Toalson6-3, 2-6, 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 standings4 teams · 7.0 Adult Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NE/Doghman/55&Over7.0W7120413146
2Tanis7119516163
3Uffelman26101428209
4Olson/Holka0812346282

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 3.10 estimated across 1 rated player. 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.

ANN TANIS
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
Ann Kubat
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Diane Byrnes
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Holly Connealy
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.10
Anne Conlon
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Chris Shouse
published
Jennifer Storm
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published
Karla Cassels
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Kathy Peterson
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Leslie Slone
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Nancy Watson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Patricia Buser
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Renee Masching
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 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.

Holly Connealy + Ann Kubat20862% games+6.2% vs expected
Anne Conlon + Karla Cassels5648% games+2.2% vs expected
Renee Masching + ANN TANIS4258% games+1.7% vs expected
Karla Cassels + Patricia Buser4450% games−0.0% vs expected
Diane Byrnes + Patricia Buser81249% games−0.7% vs expected
Diane Byrnes + Karla Cassels2445% games−8.5% vs expected
Nancy Watson + Anne Conlon9066% gamesnot enough data
Diane Byrnes + Anne Conlon5160% 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.

3.5
ANN TANIS
47W–40L career · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Ann Kubat
30W–21L career · 6 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Diane Byrnes
27W–34L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Holly Connealy
37W–24L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Anne Conlon
55W–63L career · 4 lines in 2022
23%77%<1%
3.10
Chris Shouse
4W–4L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Jennifer Storm
29W–37L career · 8 lines in 2022
not enough data
Karla Cassels
30W–36L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Kathy Peterson
16W–10L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Leslie Slone
11W–36L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Nancy Watson
15W–8L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Patricia Buser
20W–29L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Renee Masching
16W–11L 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.