Teams

Ki.Lamb55S

2024 Capital Singles 55 & Over · 3.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.25 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2024-08-10vs Ba.Wilhelm55SSplit 11
W#1 SinglesHolly Atkinson vs Leslie Jackson7-5, 6-2
L#3 SinglesJo Ann Novak vs Rita Burgess2-6, 6-7
2024-07-19vs Ba.Wilhelm55SWon 10
W#2 SinglesAnn Garey vs Susan Starnes6-3, 6-2
2024-07-19vs We.Sielaty55SWon 10
W#2 SinglesJessie Brinkley vs Linda Chabinsky2-6, 6-2, 1-0
2024-06-28vs We.Sielaty55SWon 10
W#1 SinglesCheryl Kata vs Linda Chabinsky6-7, 6-4, 1-0
2024-06-21vs Ba.Wilhelm55SWon 20
W#1 SinglesHolly Atkinson vs Barbara Wilhelm6-3, 6-3
W#3 SinglesCheryl Kata vs Rita Burgess6-1, 6-0
2024-06-07vs We.Sielaty55SWon 20
W#1 SinglesCheryl Kata vs Marie Gelston6-2, 6-0
W#3 SinglesAnn Garey vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2024-05-31Lost 01
L#2 SinglesAnn Garey vs Michelle Mills6-3, 6-7, 0-1
2024-05-28vs We.Sielaty55SWon 20
W#1 SinglesCheryl Kata vs Linda Chabinsky6-1, 6-1
W#2 SinglesJessie Brinkley vs Julie Shuey6-2, 6-3
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 3.0 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 2.95 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.

3.24
Stacie White
published
3.19
Jessie Brinkley
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.11
Holly Atkinson
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.08
Cheryl Kata
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #3 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.07
Jo Ann Novak
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.83
Kimberly Lamb
published
2.77
Ann Garey
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 3
2.67
Helen Michaels
published 3
2.55
Kelly Zargo
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.

Jo Ann Novak + Holly Atkinson8264% games+3.5% vs expected
Jo Ann Novak + Jessie Brinkley6552% gamesnot enough data
Jessie Brinkley + Holly Atkinson213 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.

Stacie White
22W–24L career · no lines in 2024
3%95%2%
3.24
3.5
Jessie Brinkley
120W–102L career · 3 lines in 2024
8%92%1%
3.19
3.5
Holly Atkinson
253W–179L career · 2 lines in 2024
19%81%<1%
3.11
3.5
Cheryl Kata
132W–83L career · 4 lines in 2024
26%74%<1%
3.08
3
Jo Ann Novak
138W–121L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%30%70%
3.07
Kimberly Lamb
4W–9L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%9%
2.83
3
Ann Garey
94W–72L career · 3 lines in 2024
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Helen Michaels
1W–2L career · no lines in 2024
10%90%1%
2.67
Kelly Zargo
1W–5L career · no lines in 2024
35%65%<1%
2.55

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.