Teams

Happy Happy Hour!

2022 Adult 65 and Over League · 6.0 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.00 / OAHU

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-10-09vs Kupuna Dream TeamWon 21
W#1 DoublesAnn Choy / Catherine Hiranaka vs Linda Onomoto / Martha Minson6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesPamela Chow / Iris Tomita vs Linda Lingle / Norma Hostelley2-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesEileen Quinn / Phyllis Klein vs Susan Weander / Sharon Winton6-4, 6-4
2022-10-02vs HIGH FIVEWon 30
W#1 DoublesCynthia Milles / Iris Tomita vs Charlotte Loo / Anne Hayashida6-2, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesApril Will / Pamela Chow vs Norene Ihori / Janice Mizusawa6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesCatherine Hiranaka / Ann Choy vs Mary Kitsu / Lois Saruwatari3-6, 6-1, 1-0
2022-09-18vs Penn PalsLost 03
L#1 DoublesKaren Nose / Eileen Quinn vs Susie Jannuzzi / Pam Isayama1-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesPhyllis Klein / Iris Tomita vs Martha Welch / Terry Beuret2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesCatherine Hiranaka / April Will vs Nancy Nagamine / Wendy Jackson6-3, 2-6, 1-0
2022-09-11vs Hi 65ersWon 30
W#1 DoublesPhyllis Klein / Elizabeth Maki vs Ellen Kishimoto / Diane Yoshida6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCatherine Hiranaka / Pamela Jinnohara vs Lynette Furukawa / Bonnie Moy6-3, 2-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesPamela Chow / Iris Tomita vs Krisna Suryanata / Rae Tadaki4-6, 6-4, 1-0
2022-09-04vs Kupuna Dream TeamWon 30
W#1 DoublesAnn Choy / Pamela Jinnohara vs Sarah Kistler / Linda Onomoto6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesPhyllis Klein / Eileen Quinn vs Norma Hostelley / Veronica MacDonald6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Maki / Karen Nose vs Ann Kelminski / Patricia Meara6-0, 6-0
2022-08-28vs HIGH FIVELost 12
L#1 DoublesPamela Chow / Eileen Quinn vs Patsy Fukushima / KARIN OKINAGA6-1, 0-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAnn Choy / Catherine Hiranaka vs Michelene Sekiya / Norene Ihori3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesCynthia U’i Milles / Karen Nose vs Dorothy Umeda / Debbie Aiu1-6, 6-7
2022-08-14vs Penn PalsLost 03
L#1 DoublesEileen Quinn / Ann Choy vs Gwenette Higa / Ann Gardetto0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesPamela Chow / Iris Tomita vs Martha Welch / Maureen O'Guin1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesPhyllis Klein / Karen Nose vs Nancy Nagamine / Susie Jannuzzi2-6, 3-6
2022-08-07vs Hi 65ersWon 30
W#1 DoublesAnn Choy / Pamela Jinnohara vs Marge Bernice / Phyllis Tsukayama6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCatherine Hiranaka / Karen Nose vs Faith Inoshita / Pam Wheat2-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesPamela Chow / Iris Tomita vs Lynette Furukawa / Ellen Kishimoto6-1, 6-1
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 6.0 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 2.65 estimated across 5 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.

Catherine Hiranaka
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
Cynthia U’i Milles
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published 3
Eileen Quinn
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.67
Phyllis Klein
usually #2 Doubles 38%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 3
2.65
Ann Choy
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3
2.65
Pamela Jinnohara
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.65
Elizabeth Maki
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.64
Iris Tomita
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
April Will
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Karen Nose
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Pamela Chow
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · 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 Nose + Elizabeth Maki6356% games+7.4% vs expected
Iris Tomita + Phyllis Klein3745% games+2.0% vs expected
Ann Choy + Elizabeth Maki3446% games−2.2% vs expected
Iris Tomita + Elizabeth Maki1537% games−5.3% vs expected
Iris Tomita + Ann Choy4649% games−6.5% vs expected
Karen Nose + Pamela Jinnohara1437% games−9.8% vs expected
Ann Choy + Pamela Jinnohara3845% games−10.4% vs expected
Iris Tomita + Pamela Chow5250% gamesnot 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
Catherine Hiranaka
17W–20L career · 6 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Cynthia U’i Milles
54W–45L career · type A · 7 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Eileen Quinn
3W–5L career · type S · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Phyllis Klein
40W–49L career · 8 lines in 2022
10%89%1%
2.67
3
Ann Choy
41W–66L career · 6 lines in 2022
12%88%<1%
2.65
3
Pamela Jinnohara
45W–69L career · 3 lines in 2022
12%88%<1%
2.65
3
Elizabeth Maki
76W–111L career · 8 lines in 2022
13%87%<1%
2.65
3
Iris Tomita
39W–53L career · 6 lines in 2022
15%85%<1%
2.64
April Will
3W–12L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Karen Nose
21W–43L career · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
Pamela Chow
14W–13L career · 7 lines in 2022
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.