Teams

WHITNEY MESA PARK #2

2022 USTA ADULT LEAGUE 55 & OVER · 7.0 WOMEN- 55 & OVER

9 players · average NTRP 3.19 / NEVADA

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 →
Schedule8 played
2022-05-26vs SPANISH TRAILWon 30
W#1 DoublesPatricia Delgado / Stefani Warren vs Deborah Davis / Sheila Stetts7-5, 6-4
W#2 DoublesAnnabel Elliott / Sara Schnabel vs Jane Casovan / Deborah Graham6-4, 5-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesPatricia Braganza / Marieke Samonte vs Peggy Latour / Marie Ramsey7-6, 7-5
2022-05-19vs DRAGONRIDGE CCLost 03
L#1 DoublesAnnabel Elliott / Ginger Nakamura vs Cindi Ray / Brenda Rowles6-4, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesDixie Stephens / Sara Schnabel vs Debbie Hicks / Kayleen Krahenbuhl1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesJoan Chevalier / Stefani Warren vs Clairen Peeters / Valerie Valow-Orris6-7, 5-7
2022-05-12vs SIENA/SUN CITYWon 21
W#1 DoublesPatricia Delgado / Stefani Warren vs Kay Higer / Orelle Gibson6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesAnnabel Elliott / Sara Schnabel vs Patricia Hawkins / Doreen Lono6-3, 6-4
L#3 DoublesPatricia Braganza / Dixie Stephens vs Cheryl Landholm / Jackie Seavey2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2022-04-28vs SUMMERLIN ARBORS #1Won 21
L#1 DoublesAnnabel Elliott / Ginger Nakamura vs Blanca Avila / Mary Schumacher Stine4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesSirina Shouldis / Dixie Stephens vs Sally Bigler / Felicia Galati6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesPatricia Braganza / Stefani Warren vs Rika Cook / Diane Sorrentino6-3, 6-4
2022-04-21vs LIFE TIME FITNESS/GVSplit 11
L#1 DoublesJoan Chevalier / Ginger Nakamura vs Patty Yamano / Joann Komanowski6-4, 1-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDixie Stephens / Sirina Shouldis vs Helen Johnson / Marilyn Fenn6-3, 6-3
2022-04-07vs NV/CASTELLI/ADULT 55 & OVER W7.0Lost 12
L#1 DoublesPatricia Delgado / Marieke Samonte vs Suni Chabrow / Sabine Curtis3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesGinger Nakamura / Annabel Elliott vs Claudia Hernandez / Desiree Maloney6-4, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesStefani Warren / Dixie Stephens vs Rose Peters / Susan Castelli2-6, 1-6
2022-03-31vs SUMMERLIN ARBORS #2Lost 03
L#1 DoublesAnnabel Elliott / Sirina Shouldis vs Cheryl Schwartz / Angela Zobrist4-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJoan Chevalier / Mindy Polasky vs Diane Paull / Janet Spelman0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesPatricia Braganza / Stefani Warren vs Arlene Babbitt / Barbie Quinn4-6, 6-4, 0-1
2022-03-24vs WHITNEY MESA PARK #1Won 21
W#1 DoublesAnnabel Elliott / Ginger Nakamura vs Kelley Ferrence / Mary Hinson6-1, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMarieke Samonte / Stefani Warren vs Ursula Kirschner / Carol Rapp4-6, 3-0
L#3 DoublesLaurie Musselman / Dixie Stephens vs June Sartini / Diane Schopp4-6, 7-6, 1-0
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 7.0 WOMEN- 55 & OVER 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 2.90 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.

3.31
Ginger Nakamura
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.20
Sara Schnabel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.17
Patricia Delgado
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.03
Stefani Warren
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
2.77
Annabel Elliott
usually #1 Doubles 79%, also #2 Doubles 21% · published 3
2.72
Sirina Shouldis
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.70
Joan Chevalier
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 3
2.67
Dixie Stephens
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.54
Patricia Braganza
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 30% · published 3
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.

Annabel Elliott + Joan Chevalier3545% games+7.2% vs expected
Annabel Elliott + Dixie Stephens6451% games+4.4% vs expected
Dixie Stephens + Joan Chevalier233047% games+1.2% vs expected
Patricia Braganza + Joan Chevalier5947% games−1.1% vs expected
Patricia Braganza + Dixie Stephens1539% games−2.4% vs expected
Stefani Warren + Patricia Delgado111150% gamesnot enough data
Ginger Nakamura + Patricia Delgado13460% gamesnot enough data
Ginger Nakamura + Dixie Stephens9756% 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.

3.5
Ginger Nakamura
76W–77L career · 5 lines in 2022
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Sara Schnabel
29W–28L career · type A · 3 lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.20
Patricia Delgado
101W–144L career · 3 lines in 2022
9%90%1%
3.17
3.5
Stefani Warren
50W–90L career · type A · 7 lines in 2022
41%59%<1%
3.03
3
Annabel Elliott
119W–186L career · 14 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Sirina Shouldis
110W–75L career · 7 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.72
3
Joan Chevalier
92W–124L career · 8 lines in 2022
6%93%1%
2.70
3
Dixie Stephens
117W–151L career · 6 lines in 2022
9%90%1%
2.67
3
Patricia Braganza
65W–88L career · 10 lines in 2022
36%64%<1%
2.54

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.