Teams

Je.Sagal.Solomon40A

2024 Capital Adult 40 & Over · 3.0 Women

12 players · average NTRP 2.81 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2024-05-21vs Ju.Brown40ALost 03
L#1 DoublesCarolyn Wieber / Dana Earle vs Juli Johnson / Shannon Beach0-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesJennifer Sagal Solomon / Christina Scagnelli vs Laura Panebianco / Angela Wood1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesMarilyn Gordian / Christy van Ness vs Amy DiGiuseppe / Brandy Presti0-6, 3-6
2024-05-07vs Er.Hemminger40ALost 13
L#1 DoublesTina Goertz / Beth Shelly vs CAROLINE FLAMANT / Jennifer van Campen0-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesChristina Scagnelli vs Brianna Shait4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCarolyn Wieber / Jennifer Sagal Solomon vs Sara Mazurak / Melanie Hewitt4-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesChristy van Ness / Marilyn Gordian vs Beth Gildea / Kimberly Lamm2-6, 1-6
2024-04-30vs Me.Black40ASplit 11
W#2 DoublesDana Earle / Christina Scagnelli vs Catherine Wilborne / Terri Bartucca6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesJennifer Sagal Solomon / Robin Finn vs ROBIN STEWART / Erin Maher5-7, 2-6
2024-04-09vs Lo.Henry40ALost 04
L#1 DoublesPerry LeGaux / Christina Scagnelli vs Brooke Jenkins / Parker Rumley1-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesCatherine Bray vs Catherine White1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesTina Goertz / Marilyn Gordian vs Lorah Henry / Settle Monroe0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesLea Edmondson / Christy van Ness vs Helen Morisey / Jenny Branch5-7, 2-6
2024-04-02vs Be.Pegram40ALost 03
L#1 DoublesPerry LeGaux / Catherine Bray vs Natalie Brincefield / Francie LaRue6-3, 6-7, 0-1
L#2 DoublesBeth Shelly / Marilyn Gordian vs Beth Pegram / Elena Ryzhikova4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesChristy van Ness / Tina Goertz vs Joyce Stevenson / Teresa Defrancesco6-1, 6-7, 0-1
2024-03-19vs Ch.Hochstrasser40ALost 12
L#1 DoublesCatherine Bray / Perry LeGaux vs Diana Kennedy / Lee Berrios-Smothers3-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesCarolyn Wieber / Dana Earle vs Amber Bruner / Leslie Taylor7-5, 6-2
L#3 DoublesLea Edmondson / Christy van Ness vs McGavock Edwards / Dana McNally3-6, 3-6
2024-03-12vs La.Fitzgerald40A3.0Lost 12
L#1 DoublesChristina Scagnelli / Beth Shelly vs Jorgelina Stroud / Laurene Fitzgerald6-7, 1-6
W#1 SinglesCatherine Bray vs Suzanne Ruggles7-5, 6-2
L#2 DoublesCarolyn Wieber / Tina Goertz vs Tina Parker / Stephanie Lee1-6, 1-6
2024-03-05vs Ki.Lamb40ALost 03
L#1 DoublesPerry LeGaux / Robin Finn vs Jo Ann Novak / Jeannette Walker3-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesCatherine Bray vs Dr Amy Linder3-6, 6-0, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCarolyn Wieber / Christy van Ness vs Mary Lewis James / Helen Michaels1-6, 1-6
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 3.0 Women 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 2.66 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.

3.03
Christina Scagnelli
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.98
Jennifer Kimball
published
2.86
Catherine Bray
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.77
Robin Finn
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.70
Marilyn Gordian
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.67
Dana Earle
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.66
Perry LeGaux
published
2.56
2.50
Lea Edmondson
published
2.41
Carolyn Wieber
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 2.5
2.40
Christy van Ness
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 2.5
2.35
Tina Goertz
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
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.

Carolyn Wieber + Dana Earle131546% gamesnot enough data
Carolyn Wieber + Tina Goertz3553% gamesnot enough data
Christy van Ness + Tina Goertz2448% gamesnot enough data
Carolyn Wieber + Christy van Ness213 matchesnot enough data
Carolyn Wieber + Marilyn Gordian123 matchesnot enough data
Dana Earle + Christy van Ness213 matchesnot enough data
Christy van Ness + Christina Scagnelli033 matchesnot enough data
Robin Finn + Christina Scagnelli213 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.

3
Christina Scagnelli
110W–109L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%41%59%
3.03
Jennifer Kimball
8W–1L career · no lines in 2024
<1%57%43%
2.98
3
Catherine Bray
61W–53L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%86%14%
2.86
3
Robin Finn
106W–142L career · 2 lines in 2024
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Marilyn Gordian
81W–48L career · 4 lines in 2024
6%93%1%
2.70
3
Dana Earle
62W–78L career · 3 lines in 2024
10%90%1%
2.67
Perry LeGaux
5W–5L career · no lines in 2024
10%89%<1%
2.66
Jennifer Sagal Solomon
3W–2L career · no lines in 2024
32%68%<1%
2.56
Lea Edmondson
0W–4L career · no lines in 2024
>99%<1%<1%
2.50
2.5
Carolyn Wieber
85W–108L career · 5 lines in 2024
0%75%25%
2.41
2.5
Christy van Ness
74W–119L career · 6 lines in 2024
0%79%21%
2.40
2.5
Tina Goertz
83W–199L career · 4 lines in 2024
0%87%13%
2.35

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.