Teams

STL/Feldman/Woodard/65 Over7.0W

2025 Adult 65 & Over · Women 7.0

14 players · average NTRP 3.25 / ST. LOUIS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-05-05vs Uelhof (65+ 7.0W)Won 21
L#1 DoublesLinda Woodard / Wendy Bell vs Jennifer Kunzi / Sandy Welkener6-7, 5-7
W#2 DoublesNorma Feldman / Catherine Luh vs Kathy Wennemann / Susan Riemann6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesShannon Lemp / Judy McGaugh vs Cathy Thurwachter / Marilyn Uelhof6-3, 6-4
2025-04-28vs Burkart/Ross (65+ 7.0)Won 30
W#1 DoublesNorma Feldman / Catherine Luh vs Anne Ross / Dina Scherrer6-1, 7-5
W#2 DoublesLinda Eisenbeis / Sylvia Bell vs Kelly Rechtlich / Margaret Ropelle6-0, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJudy McGaugh / Sherry O'Connell vs Debbie Duncan / Gloria Lewis6-3, 6-3
2025-04-21vs Eveker/Boyd (65+ 7.0W)Lost 12
W#1 DoublesCatherine Luh / Norma Feldman vs Rebecca Engelbrecht / Margreta Talen3-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJudy McGaugh / Jana Goeke vs Ann Frawley / Karen Toal6-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesLinda Eisenbeis / Lucy Klingler vs Mary Reitz / Joanne Langan5-7, 0-6
2025-04-08vs Burkart/Ross (65+ 7.0)Won 21
W#1 DoublesTeresa Entzeroth / Shannon Lemp vs Debbie Duncan / Margaret Ropelle6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesLinda Eisenbeis / Lucy Klingler vs Ruth Ehresman / Kelly Yates6-4, 6-1
L#3 DoublesBeth Causey / Sherry O'Connell vs Anne Ross / Suzanne Trotter2-6, 1-6
2025-03-31vs Eveker/Boyd (65+ 7.0W)Won 21
W#1 DoublesCatherine Luh / Norma Feldman vs Mary Reitz / Marty Tanner6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesSylvia Bell / Sherry O'Connell vs Ann Frawley / Ann Eveker4-6, 4-5
W#3 DoublesShannon Lemp / Teresa Entzeroth vs Joanne Langan / Karen Toal6-3, 6-0
2025-03-24vs Uelhof (65+ 7.0W)Won 30
W#1 DoublesNorma Feldman / Catherine Luh vs Jennifer Kunzi / Sandra Johnson7-5, 6-4
W#2 DoublesJana Goeke / Shannon Lemp vs Kathy Wennemann / Sandy Welkener2-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLinda Eisenbeis / Sylvia Bell vs Donna Austin-Miller / Susan Riemann7-6, 5-1
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.
Flight standings4 teams · Women 7.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1STL/Feldman/Woodard/65 Over7.0W5113512140
2Eveker/Boyd (65+ 7.0W)339919169
3Uelhof (65+ 7.0W)339920175
4Burkart/Ross (65+ 7.0)1551326176

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 3.23 estimated across 12 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.

3.70
Linda Woodard
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.47
Sylvia Bell
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.43
Jana Goeke
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
3.43
Shannon Lemp
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.34
Teresa Entzeroth
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.30
Lucy Klingler
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.22
Norma Feldman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 42% · published
3.21
Catherine Luh
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.15
Linda Eisenbeis
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published
3.02
Sherry O'Connell
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
2.97
Wendy Bell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Beth Causey
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.53
Janis Willmann
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Judy McGaugh
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · 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.

Catherine Luh + Norma Feldman12164% games+9.3% vs expected
Linda Eisenbeis + Linda Woodard6075% games+8.3% vs expected
Wendy Bell + Linda Woodard6267% games+7.6% vs expected
Lucy Klingler + Shannon Lemp10456% games+0.8% vs expected
Sylvia Bell + Judy McGaugh1451% games−0.4% vs expected
Jana Goeke + Sherry O'Connell91345% games−1.6% vs expected
Lucy Klingler + Linda Eisenbeis3448% games−3.5% vs expected
Judy McGaugh + Jana Goeke71051% games−3.5% vs expected
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.

Linda Woodard
244W–101L career · 6 lines in 2025
8%91%2%
3.70
Sylvia Bell
61W–108L career · 3 lines in 2025
58%42%<1%
3.47
Jana Goeke
59W–78L career · 5 lines in 2025
69%31%<1%
3.43
Shannon Lemp
100W–110L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
3.43
Teresa Entzeroth
34W–40L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%87%12%
3.34
Lucy Klingler
73W–40L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
3.30
Norma Feldman
184W–175L career · 12 lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Catherine Luh
14W–5L career · 5 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.21
Linda Eisenbeis
57W–77L career · 7 lines in 2025
14%86%1%
3.15
Sherry O'Connell
83W–157L career · 5 lines in 2025
43%57%<1%
3.02
Wendy Bell
29W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%58%42%
2.97
3
Beth Causey
49W–70L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Janis Willmann
115W–77L career · 4 lines in 2025
40%60%<1%
2.53
Judy McGaugh
60W–58L career · 5 lines in 2025
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.