Teams

TCSP-Super 65's-Lull

2024 Adult 65 & Over · 6.0 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTHWEST WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2024-06-12vs HBSQ-TierneyLost 03
L#1 DoublesMartha DuHamel / Noel Angell vs Darla Schlumberger / Anna Matysik5-7, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesBarbara Jacobs / Christina Krashan vs Patricia Liner / Bethlyn Whitney0-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesDiana Lull / Nancy Danoff vs Susan Chase / Cory Jacobson1-6, 2-6
2024-06-07vs BETC-IkedaLost 02
L#1 DoublesNoel Angell / Barbara Jacobs vs Cathy Hollar / MARILYN PORTER5-7, 5-7
L#2 DoublesMartha DuHamel / Christina Krashan vs Amy Morse / Joan Edwards3-6, 5-7
2024-05-31vs CP-Shot Sisters-EssingerLost 12
L#1 DoublesKaren Ellentuck / Barbara Jacobs vs Lynn Vona / Karen Stalker3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesMartha DuHamel / Barbara Murakami vs Constance Essinger / Linda Greenlaw6-4, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJane Price / Patti Goldman vs Marilyn Pedersen / Lynda Carlson2-6, 2-6
2024-05-20vs HBSQ-Lohman/GillespieWon 21
W#1 DoublesNoel Angell / Karen Ellentuck vs Michele Simmons / Jeanette Brandal6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesBarbara Murakami / Jane Price vs Charlotte Lohman / Karen Gillespie7-6, 6-2
L#3 DoublesPatti Goldman / Barbara Jacobson vs Shirley Havenga / Kaye Ostgard6-4, 2-6, 0-1
2024-05-10vs NTC-TuckerLost 03
L#1 DoublesKaren Ellentuck / Noel Angell vs Susan Cross / Martha Tucker4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesMartha DuHamel / Nancy Danoff vs Ann Bowden / Connie Ray2-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJane Price / Barbara Murakami vs Pia Jacobsen / Carol Geballe2-6, 4-6
2024-05-09vs NWW-BETC-HughesLost 03
L#1 DoublesBarbara Murakami / Barbara Jacobson vs Ruthann Nelson / Ming Vuong1-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJane Price / Noel Angell vs Barbara Selemon / MaryAnn O'Connell5-7, 1-6
L#3 DoublesPatti Goldman / Nancy Danoff vs Juanita Kraght / Mary Jo Leonardson3-6, 2-6
2024-05-03vs NWW-FC-ShivelyLost 03
L#1 DoublesNoel Angell / Karen Ellentuck vs Jane Shively / Debbie Schrock5-7, 1-6
L#2 DoublesBarbara Jacobson / Barbara Murakami vs Christine Bloch / Kathy McPherson2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesNancy Danoff / Jane Price vs Jenny Pinkerton / Paulette Caplener2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2024-04-17vs RBW-Howe NiceLost 12
L#1 DoublesBarbara Jacobson / Barbara Murakami vs Pam Rasanen / Debra Simmonds4-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesNancy Danoff / Karen Ellentuck vs Dawn Williams / Maren Gibson0-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesMartha DuHamel / Jane Price vs Roseshel Howe / Cynthia Moller7-6, 6-4
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 standings9 teams · 6.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NWW-BETC-Hughes7119521206
2NWW-FC-Shively6217719180
3NTC-Tucker6215924208
4HBSQ-Tierney53141023177
5CP-Shot Sisters-Essinger44131126216
6RBW-Howe Nice44121229234
7BETC-Ikeda35111327206
8TCSP-Super 65's-Lull1751939267
9HBSQ-Lohman/Gillespie0822246285

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 2.50 estimated across 1 rated player. 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.

Barbara Jacobs
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Barbara Murakami
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.50
Barbara Jacobson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Christina Krashan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Diana Lull
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Jane Price
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Karen Ellentuck
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Martha DuHamel
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
Nancy Danoff
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Noel Angell
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
Patti Goldman
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.

Diana Lull + Christina Krashan1537% gamesnot enough data
Karen Ellentuck + Christina Krashan1443% gamesnot enough data
Karen Ellentuck + Noel Angell123 matchesnot enough data
Barbara Murakami + Barbara Jacobson033 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
Barbara Jacobs
21W–47L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Barbara Murakami
2W–4L career · 6 lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Barbara Jacobson
3W–15L career · 4 lines in 2024
51%49%<1%
2.50
Christina Krashan
10W–18L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Diana Lull
7W–21L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Jane Price
2W–4L career · 6 lines in 2024
not enough data
Karen Ellentuck
4W–29L career · 5 lines in 2024
not enough data
Martha DuHamel
9W–20L career · 5 lines in 2024
not enough data
Nancy Danoff
10W–33L career · 5 lines in 2024
not enough data
Noel Angell
5W–6L career · 6 lines in 2024
not enough data
Patti Goldman
0W–3L career · 3 lines in 2024
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.