Teams

Glenmore- Egidi

2025 Charlottesville Adult 40 & Over · Charlottesville Adult 40 & Over 3.0 Women

13 players · average NTRP 2.75 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-07-21vs Sanford - Forest LakesLost 01
L#1 DoublesTamara Freeman / Debbie Lonnquest vs Mary Manley / Shauna Hogg3-6, 0-6
2025-07-15vs Merrick - KeswickLost 01
L#1 DoublesShirlee Randall / Debbie Lonnquest vs Gillian Grant / Catherine Wallace5-7, 6-2, 0-1
2025-07-07vs BHSC - Racket Science-JordanLost 01
L#1 DoublesTamara Freeman / Rebecca Wright vs Mary McFarland / Julie McCulloch3-6, 2-6
2025-07-03vs ACAC Terminetters-MeyerSplit 11
W#1 DoublesRebecca Wright / Debbie Lonnquest vs Judith Ely / Saundra Barrett6-3, 7-6
L#3 DoublesTamara Freeman / Jane Touzalin vs Diane Simon / Christina Meyer3-6, 3-6
2025-06-30vs BHSC- JohnsonLost 01
L#1 DoublesTamara Freeman / Debbie Lonnquest vs Polly Hunter / Esther Cho6-7, 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 standings for Charlottesville Adult 40 & Over 3.0 Women 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 2.66 estimated across 11 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.

3.03
Rebecca Wright
published
2.96
Debbie Lonnquest
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.73
Tamara Freeman
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.69
Shirlee Randall
published
2.68
Jane Touzalin
published
2.68
Nerissa Rouzer
published
2.64
Marie Hassanova
published
2.55
Allison Egidi
published 3
2.52
Andrea Wilder
published 2.5
2.44
Pam Socolow
published
2.38
Julie Nash
published
Brooke Vergales
published 2.5
Christine Faulkner
published 2.5
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.

Tamara Freeman + Allison Egidi3249% games+3.6% vs expected
Jane Touzalin + Marie Hassanova1641% games+0.3% vs expected
Debbie Lonnquest + Tamara Freeman6352% gamesnot enough data
Nerissa Rouzer + Andrea Wilder4167% gamesnot enough data
Marie Hassanova + Pam Socolow044 matchesnot enough data
Tamara Freeman + Shirlee Randall123 matchesnot enough data
Pam Socolow + Julie Nash213 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.

Rebecca Wright
10W–10L career · no lines in 2025
<1%40%60%
3.03
3
Debbie Lonnquest
42W–31L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%62%38%
2.96
3
Tamara Freeman
34W–28L career · 4 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
2.73
Shirlee Randall
9W–5L career · no lines in 2025
9%90%1%
2.69
Jane Touzalin
6W–8L career · no lines in 2025
9%89%1%
2.68
Nerissa Rouzer
19W–8L career · no lines in 2025
0%10%90%
2.68
Marie Hassanova
2W–18L career · no lines in 2025
16%84%1%
2.64
3
Allison Egidi
7W–8L career · no lines in 2025
35%65%<1%
2.55
2.5
Andrea Wilder
5W–10L career · no lines in 2025
0%44%56%
2.52
Pam Socolow
13W–15L career · no lines in 2025
0%68%32%
2.44
Julie Nash
4W–6L career · no lines in 2025
0%80%20%
2.38
2.5
Brooke Vergales
0W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
2.5
Christine Faulkner
0W–2L 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.