Teams

ROEDING PK TENNIS CL/ROEDING PK S70W8.0A

2025 ADULT 70&Over · Women 8.0

8 players · average NTRP 4.17 / NO. CALIFORNIA

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
2025-11-17vs BOYLE PK S70W8.0AWon 10
W#1 DoublesTerry Babcock / Hilda Fischer vs Candace Davenport / Ellen Carlton1-0
2025-10-20vs BOYLE PK S70W8.0ALost 12
L#1 DoublesCamilla Sutherland / Sandra Miller vs Lyn Little / Catherine Kennedy1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesJoan Avedian / Terry Babcock vs Ellen Carlton / Candace Davenport3-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesIrene Harris / Hilda Fischer vs Catherine Billecci / Sandy Lim6-2, 6-2
2025-10-20vs BOYLE PK S70W8.0ALost 12
W#1 DoublesJoan Avedian / Hilda Fischer vs Catherine Billecci / Sandy Lim6-4, 6-3
L#2 DoublesIrene Harris / Bette Sanchez vs Catherine Kennedy / Lyn Little2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesCarole Heinrichs / Marilyn Watts vs Candace Davenport / Ellen Carlton4-6, 5-7
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 standings for Women 8.0 have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.70 estimated across 4 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.

3.85
Camilla Sutherland
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.75
Joan Avedian
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Bette Sanchez
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.60
Terry Babcock
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.59
Carole Heinrichs
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
Hilda Fischer
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Irene Harris
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Marilyn Watts
usually #3 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.

Joan Avedian + Camilla Sutherland3249% gamesnot enough data
Marilyn Watts + Carole Heinrichs213 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
Camilla Sutherland
5W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
86%14%<1%
3.85
Joan Avedian
5W–4L career · 2 lines in 2025
96%4%<1%
3.75
4
Bette Sanchez
1W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Terry Babcock
4W–8L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%24%76%
3.60
4
Carole Heinrichs
5W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.59
Hilda Fischer
11W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Irene Harris
2W–4L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Marilyn Watts
3W–4L career · 1 line 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.