Teams

BBTL (B) 3.5W 55 & Over (Coad)

Adult 55 & Over - USTA · Adult Women - 3.5

17 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SOUTH CAROLINA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-04-08vs BBTL55/Cahill/DatawWon 10
W#1 DoublesKelly Irvine / Pamela Blaikie vs Stephanie Askew / Brooklyn Graham Kennedy6-1, 6-1
2026-03-25vs BBTL55/Miller/SunCityWon 10
W#3 DoublesPamela Blaikie / Kelly Irvine vs Jeanette Payne / Jody Winer6-2, 6-3
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 standings11 teams · Adult Women - 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1BBTL (B) 3.5W 55 & Over (Coad)101221126261
2BBTL (A) 3.5W 55 & Over (Clinton)101221130282
3BBTL55/Miller/Oldfield74211231274
4BBTL55/Schrader/Colleton River65191433285
5BBTL55/DiGiacomo/Belfair65181534275
6BBTL55/Peters/SunCity56171637316
7BBTL55/Mandel/Rosen/HamptonLake56171639315
8BBTL55/Miller/SunCity56151840314
9BBTL55/Sannem/Palmetto Bluff56151844329
10BBTL55/Cahill/Dataw38102351363
11BBTL55/Evans/Callawassie29102352359

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 3.30 estimated across 15 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.

3.50
Pamela Blaikie
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.42
Lisa Sisko
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.41
Kimberly Collett
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.38
Carolee Harkins
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.37
Penny Osborne
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.34
Molly Harner
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.31
Deanne Coad
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.31
Chris Dedel
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.28
Karen Kutz Duncan
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published
3.27
Mary Defalco
usually #1 Doubles 64%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published
Cynde Bruck
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.25
Denise Benner
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.23
MaryKay Moore
usually #3 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
3.20
Sheala Browning
usually #2 Doubles 78%, also #3 Doubles 11% · published
3.12
Gay Reichel
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.05
Dolly Herschel
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Kelly Irvine
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.

Carolee Harkins + Dolly Herschel5161% games+14.4% vs expected
Carolee Harkins + MaryKay Moore7170% games+13.3% vs expected
Chris Dedel + Karen Kutz Duncan11555% games+4.9% vs expected
MaryKay Moore + Gay Reichel14163% games+3.4% vs expected
Chris Dedel + Gay Reichel7259% games+2.1% vs expected
Deanne Coad + Gay Reichel7553% games+1.0% vs expected
MaryKay Moore + Deanne Coad7455% games−0.2% vs expected
Lisa Sisko + Penny Osborne5257% games−1.8% vs expected
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.

Pamela Blaikie
16W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%51%49%
3.50
Lisa Sisko
63W–33L career · 10 lines in 2026
<1%72%28%
3.42
Kimberly Collett
80W–43L career · 15 lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
3.41
3.5
Carolee Harkins
65W–17L career · type A · 7 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.38
Penny Osborne
51W–43L career · 12 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.37
Molly Harner
4W–8L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%86%13%
3.34
3.5
Deanne Coad
39W–33L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
3.5
Chris Dedel
42W–20L career · 7 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
Karen Kutz Duncan
47W–26L career · 10 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.28
Mary Defalco
28W–15L career · 11 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
3.5
Cynde Bruck
24W–11L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Denise Benner
23W–18L career · 6 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.25
MaryKay Moore
54W–24L career · 7 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.23
Sheala Browning
41W–30L career · 9 lines in 2026
8%91%2%
3.20
Gay Reichel
46W–26L career · 5 lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
3.12
Dolly Herschel
90W–69L career · 8 lines in 2026
0%<1%>99%
3.05
Kelly Irvine
4W–4L career · no lines in 2026
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.