Teams

KChan-CHCC

2025 Eno River Adult 55 & Over · 55 & Over Adult 3.0 Women Day

12 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-04-22vs JHolroyd-CHCCWon 10
W#2 DoublesLaurie Oakley / Sarah Sapeta vs Leslye Rood / Karen Sapir6-1, 6-1
2025-04-15vs JORegan-HRWon 30
W#1 DoublesLinda Gilchrist / Laura Porter vs Connie Brown / Marcey Setzer6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJulie Vozella / Laurie Oakley vs Helen Youngblood / June Mader7-5, 7-5
W#3 DoublesJudi Seagroves / Gillian Mishalko vs Jan ORegan / Rachel Hawkins6-1, 6-4
2025-04-01vs DWebb-ENOLost 01
L#1 DoublesSarah Sapeta / Julie Vozella vs Nancy Stovall / Janice Clayton6-4, 1-6, 0-1
2025-03-25vs YDeaver-ENOLost 01
L#1 DoublesSarah Sapeta / Linda Gilchrist vs Karen Maus / Kellianne White2-6, 6-0, 0-1
2025-03-18vs CCleary-HRLost 01
L#1 DoublesJulie Vozella / Sarah Sapeta vs Deborah Garbee / Martha Schulwitz0-6, 1-6
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 55 & Over Adult 3.0 Women Day 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 2.66 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.

2.88
Kathryn Chan
published
2.83
Laura Porter
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.77
Sarah Sapeta
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.77
Linda Gilchrist
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.65
Dorene Palermo
published
2.61
Laurie Oakley
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.55
Judi Seagroves
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.53
Karol Wenner
published
2.34
Julie Vozella
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Gillian Mishalko
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Laurie Truschel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Julie Vozella + Laurie Oakley3350% games+4.7% vs expected
Dorene Palermo + Judi Seagroves134 matchesnot enough data
Linda Gilchrist + Laura Porter134 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.

Kathryn Chan
3W–0L career · no lines in 2025
<1%80%20%
2.88
Laura Porter
9W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
1%88%11%
2.83
3
Sarah Sapeta
95W–89L career · 4 lines in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
Linda Gilchrist
7W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
3
Carolyn Hightower
1W–0L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Dorene Palermo
6W–8L career · no lines in 2025
15%85%1%
2.65
Laurie Oakley
4W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
22%78%<1%
2.61
Judi Seagroves
5W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
36%64%<1%
2.55
Karol Wenner
1W–4L career · no lines in 2025
42%58%<1%
2.53
Julie Vozella
5W–14L career · 1 line in 2025
87%13%<1%
2.34
Gillian Mishalko
2W–0L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Laurie Truschel
0W–1L career · 1 line 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.