Teams

Capeling/Nashville

2025 Combo 55 & Over - Nashville · 7.5 Women - Saturday AM

14 players · average NTRP 3.57 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-10-08vs Frantz/NashvilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesRobin Gilliam / Elizabeth Ward vs Ann Frantz / Brenda Eckhart6-2, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMichelle Palk / Sue Anne Perry vs Patricia Eudaley / Pat Yung-Okamoto6-3, 7-6
L#3 DoublesBernadette Glasgow / Desiree Appleby vs Sue Collins / Joann Covington6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2025-09-24vs Frantz/NashvilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesDodson Randolph / Kirsten Coleman vs Ann Frantz / Joann Covington3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Ward / Laura Wilson vs Julie Shaub / Stacy Miller0-6, 6-7
W#3 DoublesMichelle Palk / Sue Anne Perry vs Maura Fitzgerald / Leena Choi6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2025-09-13vs Ossman/NashvilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesNorah Buikstra / Kristie Skoda vs Sandra Elliott / Marsha Simoneaux3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Ward / Desiree Appleby vs Kathleen Carbonari / Jacqueline King1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesCindy Denson / Robin Gilliam vs Thalia Kahl / Melissa Geno4-6, 6-4, 1-0
2025-08-16vs Ossman/NashvilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesRobin Gilliam / Kristie Skoda vs Susan Manley / Kathleen Carbonari5-7, 3-5
L#2 DoublesCindy Denson / Dodson Randolph vs Janet Adamson / Jacqueline King0-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Ward / Norah Buikstra vs Donna Demouy / Nancy Preston6-0, 6-3
2025-08-09vs Frantz/NashvilleWon 21
W#1 DoublesRobin Gilliam / Michelle Palk vs Ann Frantz / Leena Choi6-2, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesChristy Sallee / Dodson Randolph vs Susan Feazel / Stacy Miller1-6, 6-7
W#3 DoublesBettina Moore / Allison Wright vs Sue Collins / Joann Covington6-4, 6-1
2025-07-26vs Ossman/NashvilleLost 12
W#1 DoublesChristy Sallee / Dodson Randolph vs Stephanie Nelson / Sandra Elliott6-3, 6-0
L#2 DoublesNorah Buikstra / Desiree Appleby vs Becky Husi / Donna Cox3-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesBernadette Glasgow / Sue Anne Perry vs Melissa Geno / Cheryl Byrd2-6, 2-6
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 standings2 teams · 7.5 Women - Saturday AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Frantz/Nashville429921176
2Capeling/Nashville1571125177

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 3.33 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.

3.70
Tanya Capeling
published
3.70
Robin Gilliam
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.61
Bernadette Glasgow
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.53
Christy Sallee
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.47
Kirsten Coleman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.33
Michelle Palk
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.32
Sue Anne Perry
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.28
Kristie Skoda
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.27
Dodson Randolph
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.15
Bettina Moore
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.11
Desiree Appleby
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.95
Elizabeth Ward
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.91
Cindy Denson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Norah Buikstra
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Dodson Randolph + Christy Sallee6261% games+15.6% vs expected
Sue Anne Perry + Kristie Skoda5549% games+1.6% vs expected
Michelle Palk + Desiree Appleby3542% games−12.5% vs expected
Sue Anne Perry + Michelle Palk314 matchesnot enough data
Christy Sallee + Kirsten Coleman224 matchesnot enough data
Michelle Palk + Robin Gilliam123 matchesnot enough data
Michelle Palk + Tanya Capeling123 matchesnot enough data
Michelle Palk + Dodson Randolph213 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.

Tanya Capeling
8W–18L career · no lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.70
Robin Gilliam
25W–21L career · 4 lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.70
4
Bernadette Glasgow
5W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.61
4
Christy Sallee
18W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
41%59%<1%
3.53
Kirsten Coleman
10W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
60%40%<1%
3.47
Michelle Palk
18W–21L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%90%10%
3.33
Sue Anne Perry
36W–34L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%91%8%
3.32
Kristie Skoda
10W–20L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Dodson Randolph
55W–43L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Bettina Moore
16W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
13%87%<1%
3.15
3.5
Desiree Appleby
11W–24L career · 3 lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.11
3.5
Elizabeth Ward
110W–130L career · 4 lines in 2025
66%34%<1%
2.95
3
Cindy Denson
6W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%76%24%
2.91
Norah Buikstra
5W–13L career · 3 lines 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.