Teams

Pizza 8.0

2026 Adult 65 & Over · 8.0W

10 players · average NTRP 4.00 / UTAH

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 →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-24vs Wooden RacketsSplit 11
W#1 DoublesKathy Miller-Rees / Jacki Joseph vs Massae Sato MacIunas / Susan Ellison7-6, 6-4
L#2 DoublesLynda Fennern / Melissa Auxier vs Marianne Saibara / Michelle Ainge6-7, 6-2, 0-1
2026-08-17vs Wooden RacketsWon 10
W#1 DoublesKathy Miller-Rees / Jacki Joseph vs Winifred Rawstorne / Sara Green6-1, 6-2
2026-08-10vs Wooden RacketsWon 10
W#3 DoublesKelle Jones / Becky Raymond vs Sara Green / Debi Johnson5-7, 6-3, 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 standings2 teams · 8.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Wooden Rackets1133754
2Pizza 8.01133859

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 3.67 estimated across 8 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.

3.97
Kathy Miller-Rees
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.87
Belinda Jensen
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.82
Becky Raymond
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.68
Dorene Sambado
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.59
Lynda Fennern
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.55
Donna Pizza
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.44
Jacki Joseph
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.43
Janice Smith
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Kelle Jones
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Melissa Auxier
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Kelle Jones + Becky Raymond212053% games+2.3% vs expected
Janice Smith + Kathy Miller-Rees221257% games+1.2% vs expected
Kathy Miller-Rees + Donna Pizza151057% games−3.1% vs expected
Jacki Joseph + Kelle Jones5647% games−5.7% vs expected
Belinda Jensen + Donna Pizza5161% gamesnot enough data
Belinda Jensen + Janice Smith2352% gamesnot enough data
Janice Smith + Donna Pizza5070% gamesnot enough data
Jacki Joseph + Kathy Miller-Rees213 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
Kathy Miller-Rees
149W–147L career · 3 lines in 2026
60%40%<1%
3.97
4
Belinda Jensen
147W–92L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%81%18%
3.87
4
Becky Raymond
83W–67L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.82
4
Dorene Sambado
102W–113L career · 1 line in 2026
10%89%1%
3.68
4
Lynda Fennern
148W–149L career · 2 lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
3.59
4
Donna Pizza
165W–106L career · 3 lines in 2026
37%63%<1%
3.55
3.5
Jacki Joseph
223W–156L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%67%33%
3.44
Janice Smith
127W–60L career · 2 lines in 2026
69%31%<1%
3.43
Kelle Jones
59W–96L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Melissa Auxier
14W–28L career · 1 line 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.