Teams

CACM GREEN

2021 USTA ADULT 55 & OVER - DEN · WOMEN 7.0 - 55 & OVER

10 players · average NTRP 3.25 / COLORADO

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2021-06-23vs GTC BLUELost 12
L#1 DoublesSusan High / Kathy Sabin vs Lisa Winston / Suzette Emerson4-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesDeidre Shanley / Claudia Pillow vs Kristen Hanson / Lisa Snider6-0, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLisa Maragon / Lise Uhrich vs Tamara Bianchi / Sue Hickey3-6, 0-6
2021-06-16vs CACM BLUEWon 21
L#1 DoublesDeidre Shanley / Kathy Sabin vs Mary Beth Church / Bev Morrow0-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesAnne Angerman / Claudia Pillow vs Paula Broe / Juli Bulloch6-2, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLisa Maragon / Lise Uhrich vs Kathryn Ague / Melanie Darden6-2, 6-7, 1-0
2021-06-09vs NJ TEALWon 21
L#1 DoublesDeidre Shanley / Claudia Pillow vs Cynthia Snavely / Lee Duhl4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesSusan High / Anne Angerman vs Mary Mittag-Miller / Mary Bare6-4, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMonika Rebholz / Pam Ammann vs Judy Ferrin / Christie Bibeau7-6, 2-6, 1-0
2021-06-02vs NJ BLUELost 12
L#1 DoublesSusan High / Lisa Maragon vs Nancy Stapp / Becky Myers2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesPam Ammann / Monika Rebholz vs Vilura Haas / Penelope Ganter3-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#3 DoublesAnne Angerman / Kathy Sabin vs Linda Anderson / Ruth Smith6-3, 2-6, 1-0
2021-05-26vs DTC YELLOWLost 12
L#1 DoublesKathy Sabin / Claudia Pillow vs Jody Hunnicutt / Karen Polzin1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesPam Ammann / Monika Rebholz vs Julie Underdahl / Liz Donahue1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesAnne Angerman / Susan High vs Elizabeth Kelly / Teri Smith6-2, 6-1
2021-05-19vs LTC REDLost 12
L#1 DoublesDeidre Shanley / Claudia Pillow vs Nancy Driver / April Kobayashi5-7, 3-6
L#2 DoublesAnne Angerman / Susan High vs Barbara Woodward / Pamela Schmidt6-2, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesLise Uhrich / Lisa Maragon vs Karla Henkart / Ellen Muller6-2, 7-6
2021-05-12vs MC YELLOWLost 12
L#1 DoublesMonika Rebholz / Pam Ammann vs Janice Tanabe / Michelle Workman4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesDeidre Shanley / Kathy Sabin vs Kathleen Keating / Linda Wagner6-3, 6-0
L#3 DoublesLisa Maragon / Susan High vs Ana Bland / Tammy Chamberlain6-7, 0-6
2021-05-05vs GTC BLUEWon 21
W#1 DoublesDeidre Shanley / Monika Rebholz vs Betty Murray / Lisa Snider6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesClaudia Pillow / Stephanie Shpall vs Suzette Emerson / Lisa Winston1-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesAnne Angerman / Susan High vs Kristen Hanson / Barbara Worthington6-4, 6-2
2021-05-03vs CACM BLUELost 12
L#1 DoublesKathy Sabin / Lise Uhrich vs Mary Beth Church / Bev Morrow2-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesAnne Angerman / Susan High vs Kathryn Ague / Peggy Andersen7-5, 5-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesPam Ammann / Lisa Maragon vs Paula Broe / Juli Bulloch4-6, 3-6
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 WOMEN 7.0 - 55 & OVER 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 2.73 estimated across 2 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.

Claudia Pillow
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Deidre Shanley
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.79
Anne Angerman
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published 3
2.67
Lise Uhrich
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
Kathy Sabin
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published
Lisa Maragon
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
Monika Rebholz
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
Pam Ammann
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
Stephanie Shpall
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Susan High
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.

Susan High + Lise Uhrich5451% games−2.1% vs expected
Pam Ammann + Monika Rebholz2739% games−12.2% vs expected
Anne Angerman + Susan High3641% gamesnot enough data
Anne Angerman + Lise Uhrich3252% gamesnot enough data
Deidre Shanley + Claudia Pillow134 matchesnot enough data
Lisa Maragon + Lise Uhrich213 matchesnot enough data
Deidre Shanley + Kathy Sabin213 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
Claudia Pillow
11W–24L career · 6 lines in 2021
not enough data
3.5
Deidre Shanley
9W–17L career · 6 lines in 2021
not enough data
3
Anne Angerman
32W–50L career · 7 lines in 2021
1%94%5%
2.79
3
Lise Uhrich
48W–77L career · 4 lines in 2021
10%89%1%
2.67
Kathy Sabin
8W–10L career · 6 lines in 2021
not enough data
Lisa Maragon
4W–5L career · 6 lines in 2021
not enough data
Monika Rebholz
3W–7L career · 5 lines in 2021
not enough data
Pam Ammann
13W–17L career · 5 lines in 2021
not enough data
Stephanie Shpall
1W–2L career · 1 line in 2021
not enough data
Susan High
13W–26L career · no lines in 2021
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.