Teams

NMurphy (WSRC)

2026 Combo Doubles 55 & Over League · 55 & Over Combo 6.5 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.17 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-08-31vs MWhite (Carmel)Won 21
W#1 DoublesLisa Wilson / Fran Kamp vs Sharon Dotson / Bethany Hoff6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLynn Davis / Gayle Gold vs Heidi Friedman / Alison Ridenhour3-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesKim Bivens / Jan Puckett vs Susan Taylor / Kathryn Wholey3-6, 7-5, 1-0
2026-08-24vs SPurdy (Charlotte Tennis)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesKim Pizii / Kathy Aitken vs Mildred Deely / Whitney Sasser2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesSherry Teat / Cathy Mcdonald vs Jane Johnsen / Jane Bond3-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesJennifer Shirley / Jan Puckett vs Karen Trigg / Toni Evans6-4, 6-7, 1-0
2026-08-17vs JThaker (BCC)Won 21
W#1 DoublesFran Kamp / Lisa Wilson vs Dori Cazorla / Sheri Newman6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesTracy Lacroix / Kim Pizii vs Julie Derrico / Andrea Sappenfield6-7, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSherry Teat / Cathy Mcdonald vs Krista Stewart / Jigisha Thaker2-6, 6-3, 0-1
2026-08-10vs MDavis/CWilson (Southampton)Won 21
L#1 DoublesNanette Murphy / Lisa Wilson vs Denise Bost / Valerie Link7-6, 3-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesTracy Lacroix / Jennifer Shirley vs Michelle Davis / Pauline Styers6-2, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesShay Hartley / Kathy Aitken vs W Kay Bridges / Cindy Wilson6-3, 6-4
2026-08-03vs LCranford (Sardis)Won 30
W#1 DoublesFran Kamp / Shay Hartley vs Cathie DeCramer / Bardeen Forman6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesGayle Gold / Kim Pizii vs Laura Flowe / Susan Crosby6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKim Bivens / Jan Puckett vs Linda Cranford / Jane Satterfield6-1, 6-0
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 standings21 teams · 55 & Over Combo 6.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NMurphy (WSRC)3072665
2TBlankenship (PCC)3063869
3TRogovin (JCC)2163661
4EKyle/Ward (Firethorne)2163650
5RSmith/RCooper (Piper Glen)2163767
6LHatfield (Palisades)21541088
7PReimann/JJZhu (Park Road)1030014
8KKuehner (Life Time)1021433
9LSobodash/White (Pine Lake)1133656
10SPurdy (Charlotte Tennis)1133752
11MWhite (Carmel)1133761
12ACheek/KLoor (Jeff Adams)1133861
13SWittek (Raintree)1133853
14EGold (OPRC)12451186
15MDavis/CWilson (Southampton)12541186
16SMyers (Queens)0103636
17CMiles (Queens)02151069
18BLothe (Mason Wallace)02151066
19LCranford (Sardis)02061273
20JThaker (BCC)03361499
21SConnor (PCC)031817105

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 2.87 estimated across 13 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.

3.13
Sherry Teat
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.12
Kim Pizii
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.03
Shay Hartley
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.91
Nanette Murphy
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.90
Fran Kamp
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.85
Kim Bivens
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.82
Kathy Aitken
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.81
Jan Puckett
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.81
Tracy Lacroix
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.79
Gayle Gold
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.75
Jennifer Shirley
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.73
Celia Stallings
published 3
2.69
Cathy Mcdonald
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
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.

Kim Pizii + Tracy Lacroix5252% games+9.5% vs expected
Shay Hartley + Gayle Gold3447% games+4.7% vs expected
Kim Pizii + Shay Hartley2546% gamesnot enough data
Tracy Lacroix + Nanette Murphy5067% gamesnot enough data
Tracy Lacroix + Shay Hartley2355% gamesnot enough data
Celia Stallings + Jan Puckett134 matchesnot enough data
Jan Puckett + Cathy Mcdonald314 matchesnot enough data
Sherry Teat + Shay Hartley314 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.

3.5
Sherry Teat
115W–51L career · 2 lines in 2026
17%83%<1%
3.13
3.5
Kim Pizii
42W–57L career · 3 lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
3.12
3.5
Shay Hartley
37W–45L career · 2 lines in 2026
40%60%<1%
3.03
3
Nanette Murphy
87W–70L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%75%25%
2.91
3
Fran Kamp
22W–39L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%77%23%
2.90
Kim Bivens
3W–18L career · 2 lines in 2026
87%13%<1%
2.85
Kathy Aitken
13W–18L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%91%9%
2.82
Jan Puckett
13W–12L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%92%8%
2.81
3
Tracy Lacroix
50W–56L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%92%7%
2.81
3
Gayle Gold
38W–62L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%94%5%
2.79
Jennifer Shirley
11W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
97%3%<1%
2.75
3
Celia Stallings
9W–21L career · no lines in 2026
4%94%2%
2.73
3
Cathy Mcdonald
15W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
2.69

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.