Teams

Bennett/Landis LRAC

2026 Adult 55 & Over Spring 1 · 4.0 Women - Nighttime

12 players · average NTRP 3.88 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-04-25vs Jones/Cramer/JNB/BPWon 30
W#1 DoublesShelia Jackson / Lindy Spaulding vs Vickie Huckaby / Mary Leigh Burnette6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesMarti Henson / Sheffield Duke vs Carol Jones / Ruth Owens6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKathleen Porteus / Julie Sanders vs Kala Cramer / Beth Hawkins3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2026-04-19vs Gardner/Wroten/LRACSplit 11
L#2 DoublesLindy Spaulding / Tammy Lukacs vs Kim Baker / Leslie King-Gillispie1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesStephanie Kyser / Courtney Cisne vs Christy Bray / Cendey Roberts4-6, 6-0, 1-0
2026-04-12vs Robinson/Lynch/LR/RebsWon 30
W#1 DoublesSandra Williams / Stephanie Kyser vs Kathy Robinson / Wendy Lynch6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesPam Landis / Courtney Cisne vs Deborah Benson / Susan Gammill6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKathleen Porteus / Christi Headlee vs Cindy Seay-Webb / Melaney Gee6-3, 6-0
2026-03-29vs Griffin/Mouden/LR/LRACWon 30
W#1 DoublesShelia Jackson / Laurel Tait vs Valerie Cloud / Judith Dugan6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesLindy Spaulding / Tammy Lukacs vs Linda Ring / Lindsay Harp6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesMarti Henson / Julie Sanders vs Natalie Griffin / Sip Mouden6-1, 4-6, 1-0
2026-03-07vs Griffin/Mouden/LR/LRACWon 30
W#1 DoublesLaurel Tait / Tammy Lukacs vs Judith Dugan / Valarie Brown6-0, 5-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesChristi Headlee / Kathleen Porteus vs Natalie Griffin / Susanna Lukas6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesSheffield Duke / Debbie Cooper vs Lindsay Harp / Sheree Meyer6-0, 6-3
2026-03-01vs Robinson/Lynch/LR/RebsWon 30
W#1 DoublesSandra Williams / Stephanie Kyser vs Kim Worrell / Cindy Seay-Webb6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesPam Landis / Shelia Jackson vs Elaine Bultena / Amie Hill6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMarti Henson / Tammy Lukacs vs Wendy Lynch / Kathy Robinson6-3, 6-0
2026-02-22vs Stewart/LR/OCWon 20
W#2 DoublesMarti Henson / Kathleen Porteus vs Victoria Dejoy / Rachel Whitmore7-5, 6-3
W#3 DoublesDebbie Cooper / Sheffield Duke vs Keina Jennings / Chyrel Henry6-2, 6-2
2026-02-15vs Stanley/Baker/Sherwood/BPWon 30
W#1 DoublesJulie Sanders / Christi Headlee vs Michele Stearns / Katie Staggs5-7, 5-2
W#2 DoublesStephanie Kyser / Sandra Williams vs Milli Stanley / Carolyn Wells6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesCourtney Cisne / Pam Landis vs Christine Althoff / Jill Childers6-3, 6-4
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 standings5 teams · 4.0 Women - Nighttime
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Bennett/Landis LRAC802317125
2Gardner/Wroten/LRAC7118612134
3Jones/Cramer/JNB/BP6217715174
4Stanley/Baker/Sherwood/BP4491532238
5Griffin/Mouden/LR/LRAC0851941263

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 3.72 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.

3.99
Christi Headlee
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.90
Lindy Spaulding
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.88
Stephanie Kyser
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.79
Tammy Lukacs
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.78
Sheffield Duke
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.77
Courtney Cisne
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
Debbie Cooper
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.71
Laurel Tait
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.66
Pam Landis
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.64
Marti Henson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.60
Kathleen Porteus
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.20
Deborah Bennett
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
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.

Pam Landis + Courtney Cisne9454% games+3.3% vs expected
Marti Henson + Tammy Lukacs3251% games−7.3% vs expected
Debbie Cooper + Sheffield Duke314 matchesnot enough data
Lindy Spaulding + Tammy Lukacs314 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
Christi Headlee
3W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
3.99
Lindy Spaulding
7W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%77%23%
3.90
Stephanie Kyser
12W–3L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
3.88
Tammy Lukacs
23W–12L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.79
Sheffield Duke
6W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.78
4
Courtney Cisne
34W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.77
4
Debbie Cooper
9W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Laurel Tait
6W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.71
Pam Landis
29W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
13%87%1%
3.66
Marti Henson
15W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
16%84%1%
3.64
Kathleen Porteus
8W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.60
3.5
Deborah Bennett
2W–7L career · 4 lines in 2026
8%91%2%
3.20

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.