Teams

5-LFarber-CHTC

2023 Eno River Combo 55 & Over · Eno River 55 & Over Combo 6.5 Women Day

13 players · average NTRP 3.25 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2023-09-21vs 8-JPermutt-CHTCWon 10
W#3 DoublesBeth Nielsen / Cynthia Kleeberger vs Katherine Jennings / Marcey Setzer6-0, 6-3
2023-09-14vs 7-NPike-HVCCLost 01
L#3 DoublesStacy Brehm / Elizabeth Gunn vs Laurie Myer / Elisabeth Wiener1-6, 6-7
2023-08-24Won 20
W#1 DoublesBeth Spinarski / Bailey Cook vs Jill Paul / Diana Knechtel6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesBeth Nielsen / Cynthia Kleeberger vs Susan Balog / Bonnie Rogers6-2, 3-6, 1-0
2023-08-22vs 1-JTillman-CHCCWon 10
W#3 DoublesStacy Brehm / Alison Chalmers vs Deon Roach / Julie Vozella6-2, 6-4
2023-08-03vs 4-KHoekstra-HRWon 10
W#2 DoublesBailey Cook / Stacy Brehm vs Rose Corey / Rebecca Georgi7-5, 6-7, 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 standings for Eno River 55 & Over Combo 6.5 Women Day 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 3.10 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.

3.48
Melissa Fitzpatrick
published
3.26
Beth Spinarski
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.14
Virginia Higuchi
published
3.14
Jane Thrailkill
published
3.13
Lynne Farber
published
3.11
Sheila Newton
published
3.11
Sarah Ederle
published
3.09
Denise Corey
published 3.5
3.08
Bailey Cook
published 3
2.91
Cynthia Kleeberger
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.87
Beth Nielsen
published 3.5
2.82
Stacy Brehm
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Tara ODonnel
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.

Bailey Cook + Melissa Fitzpatrick5174% games+9.4% vs expected
Denise Corey + Lynne Farber1443% games−9.4% vs expected
Denise Corey + Cynthia Kleeberger224 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.

Melissa Fitzpatrick
66W–33L career · no lines in 2023
<1%57%43%
3.48
3.5
Beth Spinarski
117W–83L career · 3 lines in 2023
2%94%3%
3.26
Virginia Higuchi
10W–4L career · no lines in 2023
13%86%<1%
3.14
Jane Thrailkill
11W–13L career · no lines in 2023
14%86%<1%
3.14
Lynne Farber
15W–17L career · no lines in 2023
15%84%<1%
3.13
Sheila Newton
8W–11L career · no lines in 2023
19%80%<1%
3.11
Sarah Ederle
39W–22L career · no lines in 2023
<1%20%80%
3.11
3.5
Denise Corey
11W–15L career · no lines in 2023
24%76%<1%
3.09
3
Bailey Cook
22W–9L career · no lines in 2023
<1%26%74%
3.08
3
Cynthia Kleeberger
57W–47L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%75%25%
2.91
3.5
Beth Nielsen
6W–6L career · no lines in 2023
84%16%<1%
2.87
3
Stacy Brehm
92W–161L career · 8 lines in 2023
1%91%8%
2.82
Tara ODonnel
4W–4L career · no lines in 2023
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.