Teams

Brown 40s 7.5 Combo W Wed PM

2025 Piedmont Combo 40 & Over · 7.5 40 & Over Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-10-08vs Ray 40s 7.5 Combo W Wed PMLost 03
L#1 DoublesJacqueline Herron / Nan Elizabeth Joyce vs Judiann Georgevich / Cari Powell6-3, 0-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesSallye Parker / Vangie Cruz vs Yukari Matsuoka / Gina Goy2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesStephanie Keaney / Minerva Loran vs Chetana Honnarayanahalli / Kristin Williamson1-6, 2-6
W#1 DoublesTammy Dickenson / Kathy Brown vs Pamela Hughes / Kim Taylor6-3, 6-0
L#2 DoublesSallye Parker / Marsha Tice vs Lisa Andree / Jill Perez1-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesVangie Cruz / Stephanie Keaney vs Stephanie Farabow / Bonita Johnson4-6, 4-6
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 7.5 40 & Over 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 3.40 estimated across 11 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.

3.65
Tammy Dickenson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.59
Sallye Parker
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.54
Minerva Loran
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.52
Nan Elizabeth Joyce
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.44
Jacqueline Herron
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.35
Marsha Tice
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.31
Kathy Brown
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.30
Vangie Cruz
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.28
Krisla Berreth
published
3.21
Stephanie Keaney
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
3.17
Aprille Black
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.

Nan Elizabeth Joyce + Vangie Cruz3352% games+1.7% vs expected
Kathy Brown + Tammy Dickenson2449% games−9.8% vs expected
Stephanie Keaney + Jacqueline Herron224 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Keaney + Krisla Berreth033 matchesnot enough data
Jacqueline Herron + Krisla Berreth123 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.

Tammy Dickenson
5W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
15%85%1%
3.65
Sallye Parker
146W–124L career · 2 lines in 2025
25%75%<1%
3.59
Minerva Loran
13W–18L career · 2 lines in 2025
39%61%<1%
3.54
Nan Elizabeth Joyce
7W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
45%55%<1%
3.52
Jacqueline Herron
36W–28L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%67%33%
3.44
Marsha Tice
20W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
1%85%15%
3.35
Kathy Brown
14W–21L career · 1 line in 2025
1%90%8%
3.31
Vangie Cruz
20W–19L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%91%8%
3.30
Krisla Berreth
24W–16L career · no lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.28
Stephanie Keaney
12W–16L career · 5 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.21
3.5
Aprille Black
11W–19L career · no lines in 2025
11%88%1%
3.17

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.