Teams

NNeel (Charlotte Tennis)

2026 Combo Doubles 55 & Over League · 55 & Over Combo 8.5 Women - Sat PM

14 players · average NTRP 4.15 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-09-05vs DCato (Charlotte Tennis)Won 21
L#1 DoublesMollie James / Dora Burdzinska-Drezek vs Pamela Beecher / Diane Ward3-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesNadine Neel / Connell Pinckney vs Dorothy Cato / Victoria Wasulko6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMonica Nee / Elena Donaldson vs Beth Drossman / Christine Richards6-2, 6-1
2026-08-29vs MSchrimsher (Olde Providence)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesNadine Neel / Mollie James vs Lisa Kane / Nan Miller6-2, 5-7, 0-1
L#2 DoublesChristina Peterson / Amy Langdon vs Amy Adams / Susan Jaffe6-3, 6-7, 0-1
W#3 DoublesMonica Nee / Rachael Schuler vs Leslie Peterson / Barbara Salvucci6-2, 6-2
2026-08-18vs DCato (Charlotte Tennis)Won 30
W#1 DoublesAngie Lowe / Amy Langdon vs Jennifer Gardiner / Beth Drossman1-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesNadine Neel / Tracy Brading vs Pamela Beecher / Lisa Riggins6-1, 7-5
W#3 DoublesChristina Peterson / Connell Pinckney vs Becky Tennyson / Kandi Jackson7-6, 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 standings3 teams · 55 & Over Combo 8.5 Women - Sat PM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NNeel (Charlotte Tennis)1030125
2MSchrimsher (Olde Providence)000000
3DCato (Charlotte Tennis)0103634

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 3.98 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.

4.21
Angie Lowe
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.18
Suzy Brown
published
4.16
Nadine Neel
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.16
Monica Nee
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
4.01
Tracy Brading
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
4.01
Elena Donaldson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.99
Sherri Ehrenberg
published
3.94
Christina Peterson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
3.83
Mollie James
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.82
Rachael Schuler
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.82
Dora Burdzinska-Drezek
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.81
Amy Langdon
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.77
Connell Pinckney
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
Kimberly Hanson
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.

Tracy Brading + Rachael Schuler7163% games+8.4% vs expected
Suzy Brown + Nadine Neel4258% games+6.6% vs expected
Nadine Neel + Tracy Brading10061% games−3.0% vs expected
Nadine Neel + Connell Pinckney4166% gamesnot enough data
Elena Donaldson + Rachael Schuler303 matchesnot enough data
Amy Langdon + Angie Lowe213 matchesnot enough data
Nadine Neel + Rachael Schuler033 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.

4.5
Angie Lowe
8W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
5%93%1%
4.21
Suzy Brown
62W–38L career · no lines in 2026
9%91%1%
4.18
4.5
Nadine Neel
165W–52L career · 3 lines in 2026
10%89%<1%
4.16
Monica Nee
16W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
11%88%<1%
4.16
4
Tracy Brading
111W–38L career · type A · 1 line in 2026
<1%45%55%
4.01
4
Elena Donaldson
50W–14L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%47%53%
4.01
Sherri Ehrenberg
84W–39L career · no lines in 2026
<1%53%47%
3.99
4.5
Christina Peterson
100W–61L career · 2 lines in 2026
67%33%<1%
3.94
4
Mollie James
86W–39L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.83
4
Rachael Schuler
298W–157L career · 1 line in 2026
1%91%9%
3.82
4
Dora Burdzinska-Drezek
50W–68L career · 1 line in 2026
1%91%8%
3.82
4
Amy Langdon
52W–30L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%91%8%
3.81
4
Connell Pinckney
25W–21L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.77
Kimberly Hanson
1W–1L career · no lines in 2026
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.