GEPTA/65&over/8.0WBlackman/NMSU#1

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 3.72 estimated across 6 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.

4.39

Hope Perez

usually #1 Doubles 47%, also #3 Doubles 32% · published 4.5

3.86

Grace Gomez

usually #1 Doubles 37%, also #3 Doubles 34% · published 4

3.71

Carol Shannon

usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 24% · published 4

3.71

Cindy Blackman

usually #2 Doubles 53%, also #1 Doubles 27% · published 4

3.55

Amelia Pilcher

usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published 4

3.11

Debbie Kinkel

usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 35% · published 3.5

—

Kerry Lore

usually #1 Doubles 38%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published —

—

Lia Shelton

usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #1 Singles 27% · published —

—

Sharon Ninkovich

usually #2 Doubles 56%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published —

—

Valerie Stuart

usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published —

—

Virginia Byrd

usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · 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.

Grace Gomez + Kerry Lore	10–6	55% games	−7.5% vs expected
Sharon Ninkovich + Valerie Stuart	6–4	55% games	not enough data
Hope Perez + Lia Shelton	5–3	56% games	not enough data
Amelia Pilcher + Cindy Blackman	4–4	48% games	not enough data
Grace Gomez + Cindy Blackman	4–3	55% games	not enough data
Valerie Stuart + Lia Shelton	5–2	63% games	not enough data
Debbie Kinkel + Hope Perez	6–0	69% games	not enough data
Carol Shannon + Amelia Pilcher	1–4	43% games	not 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

Hope Perez

43W–44L career · 19 lines in 2026

<1%81%19%

4.39

Grace Gomez

150W–87L career · 34 lines in 2026

<1%86%14%

3.86

Carol Shannon

58W–62L career · 21 lines in 2026

5%93%1%

3.71

Cindy Blackman

45W–47L career · 15 lines in 2026

5%93%1%

3.71

Amelia Pilcher

28W–38L career · 14 lines in 2026

34%66%<1%

3.55

3.5

Debbie Kinkel

20W–30L career · type A · 20 lines in 2026

20%80%<1%

3.11

—

Kerry Lore

81W–78L career · 21 lines in 2026

not enough data

—

Lia Shelton

144W–91L career · 40 lines in 2026

not enough data

—

Sharon Ninkovich

48W–43L career · 9 lines in 2026

not enough data

—

Valerie Stuart

30W–21L career · 15 lines in 2026

not enough data

—

Virginia Byrd

73W–66L career · 14 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.