Teams

Oak Creek/Reily-Prahl W9.0

2026 DALLAS TENNIS 55 & Over ADULT · W9.0S Saturday

16 players · average NTRP 4.50 / TEXAS

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 →
Schedule6 played
2026-02-28vs Greenhill/Berman-Blackledge W9.0Lost 03
L#1 DoublesTeresa Merklin / Lynne Wakeland vs Julie Gibson / Maureen McCaffrey1-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesSallie Canan / Laurie Reinhardt vs Margaret Struthers / Maki Berman3-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesKathleen Prahl / Lee Villalobos vs HIROE BLACKLEDGE / Laura Crain1-6, 6-3, 0-1
2026-02-21vs Greenhill/Perez W9.0Lost 12
L#1 DoublesDee Nicholson / Lee Villalobos vs Leeza Morris / Andrea Taylor0-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesBeth Quint / Jody Hassemer vs Franchel Krueger / Julie Murray6-2, 6-2
L#3 DoublesRyoko Suzuki / Jackie Reily vs Jennifer Latimer / Terry McCullough6-2, 0-6, 0-1
2026-02-07vs Greenhill/Berman-Blackledge W9.0Lost 03
L#1 DoublesTina Yates / Jody Hassemer vs Maki Berman / Eri Matsumoto4-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesKathleen Prahl / Kristin Crosswait vs Julie Gibson / Kim Osborne4-5
L#3 DoublesBeth Billig / Jackie Reily vs Laura Crain / HIROE BLACKLEDGE3-6, 1-6
2026-01-31vs Greenhill/Perez W9.0Lost 03
L#1 DoublesBeth Quint / Teresa Merklin vs Leeza Morris / Andrea Taylor3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesJody Hassemer / Tina Yates vs Kelly Woods / Julie Murray7-6, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesBeth Billig / Sallie Canan vs Holly Kerr / Tamaron Nicklas3-6, 3-6
2026-01-17vs Greenhill/Berman-Blackledge W9.0Won 21
W#1 DoublesDee Nicholson / Lee Villalobos vs Katy O'Neil / Kim Osborne6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCarie Bejcek / Ryoko Suzuki vs Keasha Behrman / Margaret Struthers7-6, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesBeth Quint / Rena Ramey vs Heather Turck / Maki Berman3-6, 4-6
2026-01-10vs Greenhill/Perez W9.0Lost 12
W#1 DoublesKathleen Prahl / Kristin Crosswait vs Tracey Howard / Kelly Woods2-1
L#2 DoublesLaurie Reinhardt / Sallie Canan vs Andrea Taylor / Leeza Morris2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesLynne Wakeland / Rena Ramey vs Tamaron Nicklas / Anne Perez6-0, 0-6, 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 standings3 teams · W9.0S Saturday
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Greenhill/Perez W9.05114415137
2Greenhill/Berman-Blackledge W9.0339923165
3Oak Creek/Reily-Prahl W9.01541430187

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 4.09 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.

4.40
Beth Quint
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.25
Kristin Crosswait
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.25
Teresa Merklin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Beth Billig
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
Carie Bejcek
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.16
Laurie Reinhardt
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
4.12
Dee Nicholson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.03
Jody Hassemer
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
4.00
Lynne Wakeland
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.99
Ryoko Suzuki
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.98
Lee Villalobos
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.94
Jackie Reily
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.89
Rena Ramey
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Kathleen Prahl
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Sallie Canan
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Tina Yates
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Dee Nicholson + Lee Villalobos3439% gamesnot enough data
Lynne Wakeland + Laurie Reinhardt3250% gamesnot enough data
Teresa Merklin + Beth Quint314 matchesnot enough data
Teresa Merklin + Jody Hassemer213 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.

4.5
Beth Quint
10W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%77%23%
4.40
Kristin Crosswait
16W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
4.25
Teresa Merklin
18W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
4.25
4.5
Beth Billig
1W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
4.5
Carie Bejcek
1W–0L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Laurie Reinhardt
8W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
13%86%1%
4.16
4.5
Dee Nicholson
9W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
4.12
Jody Hassemer
26W–13L career · 3 lines in 2026
41%59%<1%
4.03
Lynne Wakeland
11W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
51%49%<1%
4.00
Ryoko Suzuki
23W–37L career · 2 lines in 2026
54%46%<1%
3.99
Lee Villalobos
6W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
3.98
Jackie Reily
25W–28L career · 2 lines in 2026
65%35%<1%
3.94
Rena Ramey
10W–26L career · 2 lines in 2026
78%22%<1%
3.89
Kathleen Prahl
1W–6L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sallie Canan
2W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Tina Yates
5W–6L career · 2 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.