Teams

Lane 55+ 4.0 Mixed Tues PM

2025 Piedmont Mixed Doubles 55 · 4.0 Mxd Tues PM

11 players · average NTRP 3.88 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-07-23vs Majestic 55+ 4.0 Mixed Tues PMWon 10
W#2 DoublesLibby Strickland / Peter Glud vs Susie Post-Rust / Scott Majestic6-4, 7-6
L#1 DoublesLibby Strickland / Peter Glud vs Amanda Reynolds / John W Quick2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2025-07-08vs Brown K. 55+ 4.0 Mixed Tues PMWon 10
W#1 DoublesLibby Strickland / Peter Glud vs Kathy Brown / Jason Altmann3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#1 DoublesPeter Glud / Libby Strickland vs Paul Nolan / Leah Price6-3, 6-1
2025-06-10vs Majestic 55+ 4.0 Mixed Tues PMWon 10
W#3 DoublesEvelyn Strader / Peter Glud vs Mimi Cartee / John Rodenbough7-6, 7-5
2025-06-04vs Brown K. 55+ 4.0 Mixed Tues PMLost 01
L#3 DoublesPeter Glud / Evelyn Strader vs Brad McAmis / Minerva Loran3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2025-05-20vs Smith 55's 4.0 Mxd Tues PMLost 02
L#1 DoublesLibby Strickland / David Lane vs Ann Morris / Jim Cantrell1-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 DoublesPeter Glud / Evelyn Strader vs Aprille Black / Keith Black7-6, 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.

Flight standings for 4.0 Mxd Tues PM have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.59 estimated across 7 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.

3.72
Christine Hinch
published 4
3.69
Libby Strickland
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.63
Yvonne Singh
published
3.60
Barbara Fry
published 4
3.54
Lisa Andree
published
3.51
Peter Glud
published
3.45
Evelyn Strader
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
Debbie Lane
published 3.5
Robin Andree
published
Sherrie Kruse
published
Tommy Starnes
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.

Evelyn Strader + Peter Glud3448% gamesnot enough data
Robin Andree + Lisa Andree123 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.

4
Christine Hinch
11W–11L career · no lines in 2025
5%94%2%
3.72
Libby Strickland
128W–110L career · 5 lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.69
Yvonne Singh
13W–2L career · no lines in 2025
15%84%<1%
3.63
4
Barbara Fry
11W–6L career · no lines in 2025
21%79%<1%
3.60
Lisa Andree
24W–15L career · no lines in 2025
<1%39%61%
3.54
Peter Glud
16W–18L career · no lines in 2025
48%52%<1%
3.51
4
Evelyn Strader
66W–110L career · 3 lines in 2025
64%36%<1%
3.45
3.5
Debbie Lane
1W–3L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Robin Andree
4W–4L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Sherrie Kruse
32W–60L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Tommy Starnes
0W–1L career · no 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.