Teams

COTA/Dianne Bahnsen

2026 COTA USTA Adult 65 & Over Women - Fall '25 · Women 3.5

14 players · average NTRP 3.42 / GEORGIA

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 →
Schedule7 played
2025-12-09vs JMCC/Hale/GruetterWon 21
W#1 DoublesChris Brandt / Cindy Lester vs Patricia Burke / Patricia Zettek6-2, 7-5
L#2 DoublesBetsey Chastain / Brenda Lazarus vs Sallie Hale / Wanda Beard4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesDeborah Brown / Dianne Bahnsen vs Shelley Hulland / Lisa Oelke7-6, 3-6, 6-2
2025-12-04vs JMCC/Hale/GruetterWon 30
W#1 DoublesWanda Neislar / Linda Pickering vs Shelley Hulland / Susan McKinney6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesChris Brandt / Betsey Chastain vs Joan Baird / Patricia Kohle7-6, 6-2
W#3 DoublesDonna Kyle / Anne McCollum vs Donna Fiorenza / Pam Smith6-3, 7-6
2025-11-18vs JMCC/Hale/GruetterWon 21
L#1 DoublesWanda Neislar / Peggy Sullivan vs Patricia Burke / Pam Smith3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesChris Brandt / Katherine Gail Hawkins vs Donna Matthews / Susan McKinney6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesLyn Bennett / Donna Kyle vs Cathy Gruetter / Donna Fiorenza7-5, 6-3
2025-11-11vs JMCC/Hale/GruetterWon 21
W#1 DoublesWanda Neislar / Peggy Sullivan vs Donna Fiorenza / Donna Matthews6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesCindy Lester / Linda Pickering vs Cathy Gruetter / Sallie Hale6-4, 7-6
L#3 DoublesDarrah Henn / Dianne Bahnsen vs Joan Baird / Patricia Kohle6-4, 1-6, 3-6
2025-11-04vs JMCC/Hale/GruetterWon 21
W#1 DoublesDarrah Henn / Chris Brandt vs Susan McKinney / Patricia Burke6-0, 6-2
L#2 DoublesDonna Kyle / Peggy Sullivan vs Donna Matthews / Patricia Zettek6-2, 3-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesLynn Baginski / Marcheta Forrester vs Lisa Oelke / Wanda Beard6-0, 6-3
2025-10-21vs JMCC/Hale/GruetterLost 12
L#1 DoublesLynn Baginski / Nancy Flowers vs Donna Fiorenza / Patricia Zettek3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesDarrah Henn / Chris Brandt vs Susan McKinney / Patricia Burke7-5, 6-3
L#3 DoublesDeborah Brown / Anne McCollum vs Cathy Gruetter / Shelley Hulland1-6, 4-6
2025-10-14vs JMCC/Hale/GruetterWon 21
L#1 DoublesNancy Flowers / Katherine Gail Hawkins vs Susan McKinney / Patricia Burke7-6, 1-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesLyn Bennett / Chris Brandt vs Pam Smith / Patricia Zettek6-1, 0-6, 7-5
W#3 DoublesLynn Baginski / Marcheta Forrester vs Shelley Hulland / Patricia Kohle2-6, 6-4, 7-5
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 standings2 teams · Women 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1COTA/Dianne Bahnsen6114717211
2JMCC/Hale/Gruetter1671431240

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 3.05 estimated across 13 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
Wanda Neislar
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.30
Cindy Lester
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Brenda Lazarus
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.24
Darrah Henn
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.19
Donna Kyle
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.14
Katherine Gail Hawkins
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.12
Peggy Sullivan
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.02
Dianne Bahnsen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.00
Lynn Baginski
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.90
Lyn Bennett
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.88
Betsey Chastain
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.87
Linda Pickering
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.85
Marcheta Forrester
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.83
Anne McCollum
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
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.

Lynn Baginski + Marcheta Forrester3249% games+6.2% vs expected
Peggy Sullivan + Wanda Neislar4158% gamesnot enough data
Darrah Henn + Dianne Bahnsen224 matchesnot enough data
Betsey Chastain + Marcheta Forrester213 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.

Wanda Neislar
7W–1L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%89%9%
3.31
3.5
Cindy Lester
9W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.30
3.5
Brenda Lazarus
1W–4L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Darrah Henn
9W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.24
Donna Kyle
12W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.19
Katherine Gail Hawkins
6W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
15%84%1%
3.14
Peggy Sullivan
8W–6L career · 3 lines in 2026
19%80%<1%
3.12
3.5
Dianne Bahnsen
4W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
45%55%<1%
3.02
Lynn Baginski
7W–10L career · 3 lines in 2026
49%51%<1%
3.00
Lyn Bennett
4W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
76%24%<1%
2.90
3
Betsey Chastain
6W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
2.88
Linda Pickering
17W–16L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
2.87
Marcheta Forrester
10W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%86%14%
2.85
3.5
Anne McCollum
13W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
89%11%<1%
2.83

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.