← Teams

PTC-Meyers/McIntosh

2021 Adult 40 & Over · 3.5 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.82 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.55 estimated across 10 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.

4.07
Deborah Naugler
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
3.98
Rebecca Martinez Griffin
published 4.5
3.74
Colleen Nolan
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.58
Tina Farrelly
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.56
Gabriela McIntosh
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.54
Leah Buxman
usually #1 Doubles 73%, also #2 Doubles 18% · published 4
3.43
Melissa Smith
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.33
Lauren Larsen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.24
Kimberly Parks
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.07
Elizabeth Schwarz
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
—
Joy Meyers
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
Results6 ties
2021-07-25Won 3–1
W#1 DoublesHolly Kanz / Tina Farrelly vs Dottie Quinn Jacobs / Shari Levelle6-2, 6-2
L#1 SinglesKimberly Parks vs Anne Brandenburger6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJoy Meyers / KEELEY PLOMBON vs Julie Legassick / Diane di Vito6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesLeah Buxman / Kacie Wise vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2021-07-24Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesLeah Buxman / Holly Kanz vs Cathleen Lang / Rachel Novak2-0
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Schwarz / Tina Farrelly vs Nozomi Bray / Gretchen Newcomb6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesLauren Larsen / Kimberly Parks vs Gena Martinez / Cori Pierce6-2, 6-4
2021-07-18Won 4–0
W#1 DoublesLeah Buxman / Kirsten Holmes vs Janet Mills / Tina Clancy6-2, 6-1
W#1 SinglesColleen Nolan vs Carrie Willis5-7, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJoy Meyers / KEELEY PLOMBON vs Kyra John / Patti Dybdahl6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesLauren Larsen / Kimberly Parks vs Lynne Nieda / Jennifer Bane6-3, 6-3
2021-07-10Won 3–1
W#1 DoublesLeah Buxman / Kacie Wise vs Inge Marshall / Cara Williams6-2, 6-0
W#1 SinglesKimberly Parks vs Yanchen Qi6-3, 6-0
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Schwarz / Gabriela McIntosh vs Tara Morissette / Maritess Mayer6-2, 6-4
L#3 DoublesMelissa Smith / GERI DADDIO vs Karen Harlow / Wendy Nakatani6-1, 6-3
2021-06-19Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesLeah Buxman / Kirsten Holmes vs Bin He / Debbie Spitzer6-2, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Schwarz / Melissa Smith vs Joanne Maginnis / Laura Shier7-6, 0-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesColleen Nolan / GERI DADDIO vs Jinquan Wu / Susan Rolfe7-6, 4-6, 1-0
2021-06-06Won 3–1
W#1 DoublesHolly Kanz / Tina Farrelly vs Lisa Littleton / TERESA LAWHEAD6-1, 6-3
W#1 SinglesColleen Nolan vs Stephanie von Allmen6-0, 6-0
L#2 DoublesGabriela McIntosh / Elizabeth Schwarz vs Amy Cooney / Yoko Moore3-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJoy Meyers / KEELEY PLOMBON vs Jessica Meyer / Barbra Jorgensen6-3, 4-6, 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.
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
Deborah Naugler
98W–63L career
5%95%0%
4.07
4.5
Rebecca Martinez Griffin
96W–58L career
19%81%0%
3.98
4
Colleen Nolan
177W–79L career
1%99%0%
3.74
4
Tina Farrelly
115W–45L career
14%86%0%
3.58
4
Gabriela McIntosh
111W–90L career
18%82%0%
3.56
4
Leah Buxman
113W–106L career
23%77%0%
3.54
3.5
Melissa Smith
47W–54L career
0%93%7%
3.43
3.5
Lauren Larsen
81W–48L career
0%98%2%
3.33
3.5
Kimberly Parks
92W–90L career
1%98%0%
3.24
3.5
Elizabeth Schwarz
49W–46L career
17%83%0%
3.07
3
Joy Meyers
46W–50L career
not enough data
—

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.