Teams

Stewart/LR/OC

2025 Combo 55 & Over 7.5 · 7.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.83 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-10-13vs Oates/Fike/Rville/BPWon 21
W#1 DoublesLamona Gunter / Cindy Golden vs Wendy Hannah / Melissa Riddle6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesKeina Jennings / Janice Corkern vs Michele Stearns / Schelle Fike6-0, 6-4
L#3 DoublesSusan Gammill / Denise Patrick vs Milli Stanley / Katie Staggs4-6, 6-0, 0-1
2025-10-01vs Oates/Fike/Rville/BPWon 21
W#1 DoublesCindy Golden / Denise Patrick vs Milli Stanley / Michele Stearns6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesSheri Green / Tammy Stewart vs Wendy Hannah / Margaret Hoskyn7-5, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesCarolina Siguenza / Kim Gaither vs Katie Staggs / Lissa Symancyk6-2, 6-2
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 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 3.37 estimated across 8 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.

Carolina Siguenza
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.60
Cindy Golden
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.45
Victoria Dejoy
published
3.43
Keina Jennings
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.33
Lamona Gunter
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.32
Susan Gammill
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.32
Denise Patrick
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.27
Kim Gaither
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.21
Sheri Green
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Janice Corkern
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Denise Patrick + Susan Gammill4258% games+2.7% vs expected
Denise Patrick + Sheri Green2545% games−1.9% vs expected
Denise Patrick + Kim Gaither213 matchesnot enough data
Victoria Dejoy + Keina Jennings123 matchesnot enough data
Victoria Dejoy + Lamona Gunter213 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
Carolina Siguenza
4W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
4
Cindy Golden
12W–19L career · 2 lines in 2025
24%76%<1%
3.60
Victoria Dejoy
13W–15L career · no lines in 2025
65%35%<1%
3.45
Keina Jennings
6W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
69%31%<1%
3.43
Lamona Gunter
19W–14L career · 1 line in 2025
1%88%12%
3.33
Susan Gammill
18W–30L career · 1 line in 2025
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Denise Patrick
20W–21L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.32
Kim Gaither
6W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
2%92%5%
3.27
Sheri Green
14W–22L career · 1 line in 2025
6%92%2%
3.21
Janice Corkern
4W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
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.