Teams

CMiles (Queens)

2026 Combo Doubles 40 & Over League · 40 & Over Combo 6.5 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-08-25vs EBass/LThompson (Sardis)Won 30
W#1 DoublesCathy Cagney / Miranda Berkovich vs Katie Ferry / Elizabeth Tabor3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesBarbara Clement / Karen Moss vs Emily Bass / Mandy Occhipinti7-6, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAnn Stawski / Maria Solorzano vs Alison Egelson / Lindsay Thompson7-6, 6-1
2026-08-18vs SNester/SHarris (Windyrush)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesBarbara Clement / Cathy Cagney vs Katy Surlea / Robyn Riordan2-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesSarah Barden / Karen Moss vs Meredith Repp / Leslie Totty7-6, 5-2
L#3 DoublesChristine Miles / Sharon Smaston vs Jennifer Briggs / Mary Riebesell1-6, 6-7
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 standings for 40 & Over Combo 6.5 Women have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 2.69 estimated across 9 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.

3.31
Cathy Cagney
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.90
Miranda Berkovich
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.81
Sarah Barden
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.74
Barbara Clement
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.73
Maria Solorzano
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.48
Karen Lindquist
published
2.48
Robyn Haug
published
2.38
Sharon Smaston
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.35
Ann Stawski
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
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.

Robyn Haug + Sharon Smaston0531% gamesnot enough data
Cathy Cagney + Miranda Berkovich303 matchesnot enough data
Karen Lindquist + Sharon Smaston033 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.

3.5
Cathy Cagney
47W–45L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%8%
3.31
Miranda Berkovich
12W–4L career · 1 line in 2026
0%<1%>99%
2.90
Sarah Barden
25W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
0%1%99%
2.81
3
Barbara Clement
14W–11L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
2.74
Maria Solorzano
1W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
0%5%95%
2.73
Karen Lindquist
7W–60L career · no lines in 2026
0%55%45%
2.48
Robyn Haug
2W–7L career · no lines in 2026
0%55%45%
2.48
Sharon Smaston
2W–13L career · 1 line in 2026
0%80%20%
2.38
2.5
Ann Stawski
9W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
0%85%15%
2.35

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.