Teams

PEAK-Enyeart

2025 Adult 55 & Over · 8.0 WOMEN

8 players · average NTRP 4.00 / EASTERN WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2024-10-26vs CBRC-WhiteLost 12
L#1 DoublesLiz Enyeart / Lea Williams vs Marjorie Petersen / Judy Knox3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesLaura Jordahl / Wendy Teets vs Sarah Miller / Rise Hawley2-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesMary Rawlsky / Yuying Johnson vs Trish Thompson / Kathleen McAteer6-4, 6-3
2024-10-26vs Park Fit-Central Park HagenWon 21
W#1 DoublesValerie Garcia / Liz Enyeart vs Kimberly Bayley / Lisa Hagen6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesWendy Teets / Tracy Carlsen vs Marlaine Moore / Jlynn Spitz4-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesYuying Johnson / Mary Rawlsky vs Janie Slater / Lori Nicol4-6, 6-4, 1-0
2024-10-25vs EW-WRAC-HoughtonLost 12
L#1 DoublesLea Williams / Mary Rawlsky vs Elizabeth Nott / KIMBERLY HABICH3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesLaura Jordahl / Wendy Teets vs Julie Meyer / Anne Papik6-2, 7-6
L#3 DoublesLiz Enyeart / Valerie Garcia vs Connie Russ / Victoria van Zile1-6, 6-3, 0-1
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 standings7 teams · 8.0 WOMEN
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1HRAC-Dey Hood River40102889
2EW-WRAC-Houghton2163771
3CBRC-White21451078
4Park Fit Club-Northpark & Friends226613105
5Park Fit-Central Park Hagen12451185
6PEAK-Enyeart12451190
7PC-Otto0421020139

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 3.61 estimated across 4 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.

3.84
Wendy Teets
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.61
Valerie Garcia
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.55
Mary Rawlsky
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.45
Lea Williams
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Laura Jordahl
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Liz Enyeart
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Tracy Carlsen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Yuying Johnson
usually #3 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.

Laura Jordahl + Wendy Teets7353% games+8.8% vs expected
Liz Enyeart + Wendy Teets9555% games+2.6% vs expected
Liz Enyeart + Laura Jordahl9556% gamesnot enough data
Mary Rawlsky + Valerie Garcia2445% gamesnot enough data
Valerie Garcia + Yuying Johnson3351% gamesnot enough data
Liz Enyeart + Tracy Carlsen2350% gamesnot enough data
Liz Enyeart + Mary Rawlsky314 matchesnot enough data
Liz Enyeart + Lea Williams213 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.

Wendy Teets
36W–19L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%87%12%
3.84
4
Valerie Garcia
44W–48L career · 2 lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
3.61
Mary Rawlsky
14W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
35%65%<1%
3.55
Lea Williams
19W–21L career · 2 lines in 2025
64%36%<1%
3.45
Laura Jordahl
20W–11L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Liz Enyeart
40W–30L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tracy Carlsen
12W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Yuying Johnson
16W–22L career · 2 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.