← Teams

MAC-Lovett/Williams

2022 Adult 55 & Over · 8.0 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.95 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.50 estimated across 9 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.

4.06
Stacy Hawkins Parker
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published 4.5
3.95
Amy Leahy
usually #2 Doubles 63%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published 4.5
—
Kim Stevens
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.67
Linda Lovett
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.58
Heidi Wilcox
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.58
Catherine Go
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.43
Terri Pickard
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.24
Dana McKillop
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.08
Alison Davis
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
2.91
Nancy Williams
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
—
Katy Marcy
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 0
Results8 ties
2021-11-19Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesStacy Hawkins Parker / Nancy Williams vs Sue Edmonds / Kelley Gaylor6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesKim Stevens / Sally Lovett vs Jenny Pizot / Susan Agee7-5, 6-2
2021-11-14Lost 1–2
W#1 DoublesAlison Davis / Stacy Hawkins Parker vs Barbara Adams / Michele Snyder6-3, 6-7, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCatherine Go / Heidi Wilcox vs Liz DelPlato / Katherine Kralj6-1, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesBrenda Bonnell / Katy Marcy vs Misty Bettis / Rise Hawley6-4, 6-2
2021-10-31Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesLinda Lovett / Catherine Go vs Michele Heinrichson / Robby Lafleur6-1, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesTerri Pickard / Sara Salvi vs Judith Kobin / Sue Harrison5-7, 6-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSally Lovett / Kim Stevens vs Cindy Speck / Naomi Steinberg4-6, 6-4, 1-0
2021-10-24Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesStacy Hawkins Parker / Kim Wright vs Kathleen Budnick / Joelle Lewis2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKaty Marcy / Sally Lovett vs Colleen Hamilton / Roxanne Imbrie7-5, 7-6
W#3 DoublesPam Saftler / Dana McKillop vs Nancy Atkins / Karen McNairy6-4, 6-3
2021-10-16Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesStacy Hawkins Parker / Alison Davis vs Sharon Grilley / Tamara Witcosky5-7, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesTerri Pickard / Linda Lovett vs Lynn Sosa / Anne Fahlbusch6-4, 6-3
2021-10-09Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesHeidi Wilcox / Kim Stevens vs Michi VanGrunsven / RENEE VANDEGRIEND6-4, 6-0
L#2 DoublesNancy Williams / Amy Leahy vs Carol Chiu / Linda Barr6-3, 1-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSara Salvi / Dana McKillop vs Cindy Rushall / Laura Webb2-6, 6-2, 1-0
2021-10-02Won 1–0
W#2 DoublesCatherine Go / Linda Lovett vs Mary Elliott / Char Riley6-1, 6-2
2021-09-26Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesTerri Pickard / Linda Lovett vs Molly Odonnell / Cathy Gatzke6-7, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCatherine Go / Brenda Bonnell vs Bo Yu / Dottie Quinn Jacobs6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesKim Stevens / Katy Marcy vs Timothea Barnatan / Ellen Hodges7-5, 6-1
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.
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.

4.5
Stacy Hawkins Parker
58W–55L career
8%92%0%
4.06
4.5
Amy Leahy
73W–57L career
27%73%0%
3.95
4
Kim Stevens
56W–44L career
not enough data
—
4
Linda Lovett
93W–105L career
4%96%0%
3.67
4
Heidi Wilcox
86W–87L career
15%85%0%
3.58
4
Catherine Go
87W–77L career
18%82%0%
3.58
4
Terri Pickard
44W–44L career
52%48%0%
3.43
3.5
Dana McKillop
23W–65L career
1%98%0%
3.24
3.5
Alison Davis
80W–62L career
27%73%1%
3.08
3.5
Nancy Williams
59W–52L career
59%41%0%
2.91
0
Katy Marcy
28W–21L career
not enough data
—

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.