Teams

Miller/Chatt

2025 Adult 65 & Over-Chattanooga · 3.5 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.33 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-05-12vs Williams/ChattanoogaLost 03
L#1 DoublesAnn Epps / Susan Bosworth vs Pam Womack / Linda Benton1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesBeth Daugherty / Carol Starnes vs Kathy Williams / Judy Pratt4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesFreda Miller / Ann Carroll vs Deborah Nation / Betty Andersen3-6, 2-6
2025-05-05vs Williams/ChattanoogaLost 03
L#1 DoublesCarol Starnes / Ann Epps vs Janice Hersperger / Pat Weddle4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesPatty Vanvalkinburgh / Jana Henson vs Linda Benton / Pam Womack2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesMary Miller / Janet Lawrence vs Betty Andersen / Deborah Nation1-6, 1-6
2025-04-28vs Williams/ChattanoogaLost 03
L#1 DoublesJanet Lawrence / Caroline Ashton vs Melinda Ellis / Shana Patten5-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesJudy DeFoor / Mary Miller vs Kimberly Conner / Libby Dixon3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesPatty Vanvalkinburgh / Ann Carroll vs Pat Weddle / Janice Hersperger1-6, 5-7
2025-04-14vs Williams/ChattanoogaLost 03
L#1 DoublesLiz Davidson / Kim Glascock vs Melinda Ellis / Shana Patten2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesSusan Bosworth / Carol Starnes vs Libby Dixon / Pat Weddle2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesJana Henson / Ann Carroll vs Betty Andersen / Deborah Nation0-6, 4-6
2025-04-07vs Williams/ChattanoogaLost 12
L#1 DoublesAnn Epps / Beth Daugherty vs Shana Patten / Melinda Ellis0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesFreda Miller / Janet Lawrence vs Libby Dixon / Pat Weddle0-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesMary Miller / Caroline Ashton vs Deborah Rogers / Judy Pratt3-6, 6-4, 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 standings2 teams · 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Williams/Chattanooga50141272
2Miller/Chatt0511429180

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 2.94 estimated across 8 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.

Carol Starnes
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.17
Caroline Ashton
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.06
Kim Glascock
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.04
Judy DeFoor
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.02
Beth Daugherty
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.98
Ann Epps
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.86
Janet Lawrence
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.84
Jana Henson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Freda Miller
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.58
Ann Carroll
published 3
Liz Davidson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Patty Vanvalkinburgh
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Susan Bosworth
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Beth Daugherty + Ann Epps2344% gamesnot enough data
Janet Lawrence + Jana Henson123 matchesnot enough data
Kim Glascock + Ann Epps033 matchesnot enough data
Patty Vanvalkinburgh + Jana Henson033 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.

3.5
Carol Starnes
0W–7L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Caroline Ashton
10W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.17
Kim Glascock
4W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
32%68%<1%
3.06
Judy DeFoor
2W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
39%61%<1%
3.04
3.5
Beth Daugherty
2W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
45%55%<1%
3.02
3.5
Ann Epps
5W–20L career · 3 lines in 2025
56%44%<1%
2.98
Janet Lawrence
22W–25L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%86%14%
2.86
Jana Henson
4W–20L career · 2 lines in 2025
88%12%<1%
2.84
3
Freda Miller
0W–4L career · type A · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
3
Ann Carroll
0W–3L career · no lines in 2025
27%73%<1%
2.58
Liz Davidson
0W–2L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Patty Vanvalkinburgh
5W–16L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Susan Bosworth
2W–8L career · 2 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.