Teams

Emerald Servivors

2026 Tri Level 55 and Above · Womens 3.0

6 players · average NTRP / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-03-01vs WhitleyLost 12
L#1 DoublesMarie Tingle / Susan Elmore vs Missy Barrow / Diana Cox4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesLuann Scruggs / Lisa Zurawski vs Azita Movahed / Margaret Boles1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesYvonne Kleiman / Lulu Conekin vs Paige Anderson / Tina Brandalik6-4, 6-4
2026-02-28vs Net ChicsLost 12
L#1 DoublesSusan Elmore / Marie Tingle vs Marsha Pierson / Doris Smith2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesLisa Zurawski / Susan Moore vs Debra Johann / Tracy Wilkinson3-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesYvonne Kleiman / Luann Scruggs vs Susan Hardison / Kathryn Custer4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2026-02-28vs walnut creek ccWon 20
W#1 DoublesSusan Elmore / Marie Tingle vs Susan Johnson / Terry Ray6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesYvonne Kleiman / Lulu Conekin vs Alice Hunter / Jil Young6-4, 6-3
2026-02-28vs WhitleyLost 12
L#1 DoublesSusan Elmore / Marie Tingle vs Missy Barrow / Michele Mayo7-5, 0-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesLisa Zurawski / Rachel Smith vs Kelly Whitley / Leslie Rogers4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLuann Scruggs / Lulu Conekin vs Kelly Varnell / Tina Brandalik4-6, 6-0, 1-0
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 standings4 teams · Womens 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Net Chics50132676
2Whitley328717128
3Emerald Servivors136614112
4walnut creek cc0401224144

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 2.95 estimated across 6 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.

3.23
Marie Tingle
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.22
Susan Elmore
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.91
Lisa Zurawski
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.85
Lulu Conekin
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.76
Luann Scruggs
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.76
Yvonne Kleiman
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.

Yvonne Kleiman + Lulu Conekin8166% games−1.1% vs expected
Susan Elmore + Marie Tingle1639% games−12.7% 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.

Marie Tingle
12W–26L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%5%95%
3.23
Susan Elmore
3W–9L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%6%94%
3.22
Lisa Zurawski
11W–40L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%74%25%
2.91
Lulu Conekin
22W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%86%13%
2.85
Luann Scruggs
3W–14L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%92%4%
2.76
Yvonne Kleiman
15W–21L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
2.76

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.