← Teams

SHC-Mathews

2019 Adult 55 & Over · 9.0 Women

7 players · average NTRP 4.36 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.93 estimated across 6 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.

4.26
Kim Hill
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 4.5
—
Sandy Garry
usually #1 Doubles 68%, also #2 Doubles 23% · published 4.5
4.23
Carol Woolman
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
4.02
Karen Sullivan
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
3.83
June Wu
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4.5
3.67
Anne McCroskey
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.57
Marie Picard
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
Results9 ties
2018-11-18Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesSandy Garry / June Wu vs Andrea Bowen / Amy Leahy6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesCarol Woolman / Tami Oglesby vs Stacy Hawkins Parker / Jennifer Devoe6-0, 6-4
L#3 DoublesKaren Mathews / Kim Hill vs Elise Orban / Lori Layne7-5, 6-3
2018-11-10Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesSandy Garry / June Wu vs Janet Walker / Tracy Bardell6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesLinda Fletcher / Karen Sullivan vs Jana Corder / Lisa Lyon6-2, 7-5
2018-11-04Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesKaren Mathews / Carol Woolman vs Linda Lovett / Lisa Provost7-5, 6-1
W#2 DoublesTami Oglesby / June Wu vs Yumiko Pike / Gale Volk6-3, 7-6
L#3 DoublesDebra Rifkin / Kim Hill vs Deborah Borchers / Teresa Neal6-7, 7-5, 1-0
2018-10-28Split 1–1
L#1 DoublesKim Hill / Carol Woolman vs Amy Leahy / Sue Gregoire3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAnne McCroskey / Karen Sullivan vs Lori Layne / Mary Kurz6-1, 7-5
2018-10-14Won 2–0
W#2 DoublesJanine Paulson / Kim Hill vs Becky Rey / Linda Lovett6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesAnne McCroskey / Karen Sullivan vs Yumiko Pike / Ginny Nichols6-1, 6-0
2018-09-28Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesSandy Garry / Carol Woolman vs Jill Lee / Janelle Laurila6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesKaren Mathews / Kim Hill vs Donna Roisom / Jana Corder6-2, 6-1
L#3 DoublesAnne McCroskey / Marie Picard vs Tracy Bardell / Jennifer Hill7-5, 1-6, 1-0
2018-09-23Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesSandy Garry / Carol Woolman vs Deborah Borchers / Patricia Evola6-3, 5-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKaren Mathews / Kim Hill vs Gale Volk / Becky Rey6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesMarie Picard / June Wu vs Yumiko Pike / Lisa Provost7-6, 7-5
2018-09-16Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesJanine Paulson / June Wu vs Sue Gregoire / Mary Anderson6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesKaren Mathews / Carol Woolman vs Jennifer Devoe / Shannon Dilorenzo6-3, 6-3
L#3 DoublesBonnie Sidoff / Kim Hill vs Amy Leahy / Elise Orban6-4, 6-3
2018-09-08Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesCarol Woolman / Karen Mathews vs Donna Roisom / Lisa Lynch6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJanine Paulson / Marie Picard vs Janet Walker / Amy Alpern5-7, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLinda Fletcher / Karen Sullivan vs Mary Elliott / Jennifer Hill4-6, 6-4, 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.
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.

4.5
Kim Hill
94W–59L career
0%98%2%
4.26
4.5
Sandy Garry
145W–81L career
not enough data
—
4.5
Carol Woolman
31W–13L career · type S
1%96%3%
4.23
4.5
Karen Sullivan
62W–81L career
12%88%0%
4.02
4.5
June Wu
148W–91L career
58%42%0%
3.83
4
Anne McCroskey
34W–52L career
6%94%0%
3.67
4
Marie Picard
128W–96L career
18%82%0%
3.57

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.