Teams

MCC DOWNEY/STEINEKER

2026 Spring USTA 55 & Over Day League-Montgomery · 3.0 Women Day

9 players · average NTRP / ALABAMA

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 →
Schedule9 played
2026-03-30vs Wynlakes - GarnerLost 12
L#1 DoublesKatherine Gayden / Martha Aman vs Carla Rush / Joan S Brown2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesShirley Downey / Karen Steineker vs Cathy Garner / Conitha King7-6, 7-6
L#3 DoublesSandra Perdue / Katherine Crum vs Joy Darley / Carmen Lanier3-6, 1-6
2026-03-23vs Lagoon SellersLost 12
W#1 DoublesMandy Carter / Karen Steineker vs Kim McDonald / Diane Johnson7-5, 6-3
L#2 DoublesKatherine Gayden / Martha Aman vs Karen Agnello / Mary Weidler1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesPat Watkins / Katherine Crum vs Sharon Woernle / Joan Ensley1-6, 6-7
2026-03-20vs Wynlakes - GarnerWon 21
W#1 DoublesShirley Downey / Karen Steineker vs Joy Darley / Anna Owen6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesKatherine Gayden / Pat Watkins vs Conitha King / Cathy Garner7-5, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMartha Aman / Katherine Crum vs Joan S Brown / Lynn Peck2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2026-03-09vs Lagoon CannadySplit 11
L#1 DoublesShirley Downey / Karen Steineker vs Deborah Langham / Jennifer Bennett3-6, 6-1, 0-1
W#2 DoublesKatherine Gayden / Katie Espy vs Kay Cannady / Judith Heinzman6-2, 7-6
2026-03-02vs Lagoon SellersWon 21
L#1 DoublesMartha Aman / Katherine Crum vs Karen Agnello / Kim McDonald2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesKatherine Gayden / Sheila Mitchell vs Regina Dinger / Sharon Woernle3-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesShirley Downey / Karen Steineker vs Gina Sellers / Mary Weidler6-3, 6-2
2026-02-16vs Lagoon CannadyWon 21
L#1 DoublesSandra Perdue / Katherine Crum vs Susan Walls / Jennifer Bennett4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesMandy Carter / Pat Watkins vs Deborah Langham / Supin Scott6-4, 6-1
W#3 DoublesKatherine Gayden / Katie Espy vs Kay Cannady / Vickie Wilson6-1, 6-0
2026-02-13vs Wynlakes - GarnerWon 30
W#1 DoublesShirley Downey / Karen Steineker vs Wendy Guthrie / Susan Miller6-0, 7-6
W#2 DoublesKatie Espy / Katherine Gayden vs Carmen Lanier / Anna Owen2-6, 6-0, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMartha Aman / Sheila Mitchell vs Tara Chambliss / Katharine Buelow6-3, 6-2
2026-02-09vs Lagoon SellersSplit 11
L#1 DoublesPat Watkins / Sheila Mitchell vs Karen Agnello / Daisy Zaner1-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesKatherine Gayden / Katie Espy vs Regina Dinger / Felicia Brooks7-6, 6-1
2026-01-28vs Lagoon CannadyWon 30
W#1 DoublesShirley Downey / Karen Steineker vs Deborah Langham / Martha Sikes6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesKatherine Gayden / Katie Espy vs Vanessa Edwards / Jennifer Bennett6-2, 7-5
W#3 DoublesMartha Aman / Sheila Mitchell vs Patricia Dumas / Betsy Cannon6-0, 7-5
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 · 3.0 Women Day
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MCC DOWNEY/STEINEKER7218921202
2Wynlakes - Garner6215922181

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 2.80 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.

3.06
Karen Steineker
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published
2.85
Shirley Downey
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
2.82
Martha Aman
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.79
Mandy Carter
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.78
Katherine Gayden
usually #2 Doubles 78%, also #3 Doubles 11% · published
2.75
Katie Espy
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
2.71
Katherine Crum
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
2.71
Sandra Perdue
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.69
Pat Watkins
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · 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.

Katherine Gayden + Katie Espy5161% games+5.4% vs expected
Shirley Downey + Karen Steineker13458% games+3.9% vs expected
Katherine Crum + Sandra Perdue1541% games−4.6% vs expected
Katherine Gayden + Martha Aman1440% games−9.4% vs expected
Katherine Gayden + Katherine Crum213 matchesnot enough data
Katherine Crum + Katie Espy213 matchesnot enough data
Katherine Crum + Martha Aman033 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.

Karen Steineker
28W–9L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%34%66%
3.06
Shirley Downey
13W–5L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%86%14%
2.85
Martha Aman
7W–11L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
2.82
Mandy Carter
10W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.79
Katherine Gayden
10W–8L career · 9 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
2.78
Katie Espy
9W–4L career · 5 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
2.75
Katherine Crum
7W–12L career · 5 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
2.71
Sandra Perdue
10W–16L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%7%93%
2.71
Pat Watkins
2W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
9%90%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.