Teams

Ka.Serow55C5.5

2025 Capital Combo 55 & Over · 5.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 2.90 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-09-22vs Ly.Longest55CWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Blume / Maria Riemann vs Priscilla Nanney / Sally Sikes6-0, 6-1
2025-09-15vs Ly.Longest55CWon 20
W#1 DoublesDebra Allen / Darsan Russo vs Lavonne Moore / Kendra Gladwin6-1, 7-6
W#3 DoublesKathleen Serow / Maria Riemann vs Vanessa Fleischmann / Lacey Seaton6-1, 6-0
2025-09-08vs Ly.Longest55CWon 20
W#1 DoublesKathleen Serow / Maria Riemann vs Jeanne Russell / Lacey Seaton6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesDebra Allen / Darsan Russo vs Lavonne Moore / Terry Marcott6-0, 6-1
2025-08-25vs Ly.Longest55CWon 10
W#2 DoublesKaren Blume / Darsan Russo vs Priscilla Nanney / Kendra Gladwin6-1, 6-0
2025-08-18vs Ly.Longest55CWon 10
W#1 DoublesDarsan Russo / Kathleen Serow vs Jeanne Russell / Sally Sikes5-7, 7-6, 1-0
2025-08-11vs Ly.Longest55CLost 02
L#1 DoublesKaren Blume / Randi Rosen vs Jeanne Russell / Kendra Gladwin4-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesMaria Riemann / Darsan Russo vs Lynn Longest / Lacey Seaton4-6, 6-2, 0-1
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 5.5 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 2.49 estimated across 8 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.

2.87
Karen Blume
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.83
Kathleen Serow
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
Ann Walters
published 3
2.64
Gwen Coyte
published
2.60
Carol Rosser
published 3
2.43
Martha Lempicke
published
2.35
Randi Rosen
published
2.13
Darsan Russo
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 2.5
2.04
Jill Rhim
published
Maria Riemann
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 Blume + Carol Rosser314 matchesnot enough data
Carol Rosser + Kathleen Serow213 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
Karen Blume
42W–37L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%82%18%
2.87
3
Kathleen Serow
132W–119L career · 6 lines in 2025
1%87%12%
2.83
3
Ann Walters
2W–0L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Gwen Coyte
1W–4L career · no lines in 2025
16%84%1%
2.64
3
Carol Rosser
45W–76L career · no lines in 2025
24%75%<1%
2.60
Martha Lempicke
0W–4L career · no lines in 2025
69%31%<1%
2.43
Randi Rosen
11W–12L career · no lines in 2025
0%86%14%
2.35
2.5
Darsan Russo
67W–102L career · 5 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.13
Jill Rhim
0W–3L career · no lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.04
Maria Riemann
2W–0L career · no lines 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.