Teams

ETC-Double The Fun-Otterholt

2021 Adult 55 & Over · 6.0 Women

10 players · average NTRP 2.78 / NORTHWEST WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2020-11-01vs Lower Woodland-Tenn-Acious-WhitmanLost 03
L#1 DoublesMargaret Bolan / Donna Rigas vs Heather Curtis / Debra Beauchamp0-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesGinny Larsen / Nan Bettinger vs Beverly Reed / Lynne McCaslin1-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesJulie Winkler / Pamela Nelson vs Martha Tucker / Cathleen Summers3-6, 1-6
2020-10-25vs TCSP-SmithLost 12
L#1 DoublesGinny Larsen / Carrie Toppano vs Karen Ellentuck / Christina Krashan3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesNan Bettinger / Donna Rigas vs Dorothy Darrow / Maria Larionoff4-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesNancy Otterholt / Deborah Milter vs Diana Lull / Ellen Sneed6-3, 6-3
2020-10-17vs BETC-IwasakiLost 12
L#1 DoublesGinny Larsen / Susan Iverson vs Carol Markham / Jill Patterson4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesJulie Winkler / Pamela Nelson vs Barbara Selemon / Jill Wakefield2-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesDonna Rigas / Nancy Otterholt vs Juliet Wu / MaryAnn O'Connell6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2020-10-10vs BC-HancockLost 03
L#1 DoublesMargaret Bolan / Carrie Toppano vs Sherilyn Anderson / Lisa Cheung4-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesDeborah Milter / Julie Winkler vs Christine Bloch / Jackie Wilkinson6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesNan Bettinger / Nancy Otterholt vs Sheri Olsen / Anne Bratton4-6, 6-7
2020-10-03vs CP-La CavaLost 03
L#1 DoublesMargaret Bolan / Julie Winkler vs Lili Chang / Elaine Loong4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesNan Bettinger / Deborah Milter vs Marcia Chapman / Constance Essinger2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesPamela Nelson / Donna Rigas vs Heidi Sorensen / Mary van Zyl3-6, 4-6
2020-09-26vs CAC/SL-Orange Crush-McPhersonLost 02
L#1 DoublesGinny Larsen / Margaret Bolan vs Sandy Rauen / Lee Darrow6-4, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCarrie Toppano / Donna Rigas vs Lee Aalund / Stacy Bishop Lawrence7-5, 4-6, 0-1
2020-09-19vs MC-SchrockLost 03
L#1 DoublesMargaret Bolan / Ginny Larsen vs Penny Jay / Jessica Price2-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesDeborah Milter / Pamela Nelson vs Diane Erickson / Yoon Joo Han0-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesNancy Otterholt / Carrie Toppano vs Sara Bouwman / Yvonne Klopfenstein0-6, 4-6
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 standings13 teams · 6.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Lower Woodland-Tenn-Acious-Whitman6118314135
2TCSP-55% Stuart6115616162
3HBSQ-Sea-gals-Swingle6114716155
4CAC/SL-Orange Crush-McPherson6115619163
5RBW-Net Worth Doubles-Williams5212921192
6AYTC (OUTDOORS) Team Golden-Berlin4312921175
7BETC-Iwasaki4391227212
8CP-La Cava3413821175
9CP-Baird25101123204
10MC-Schrock2581326187
11EDG-55+ and Fabulous Ladies-Pine2571429217
12BC-Blazers-Currey1671429228
13ETC-Double The Fun-Otterholt0721939245

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 2.59 estimated across 7 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.

3.23
Ginny Larsen
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
2.92
Susan Iverson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.73
Donna Rigas
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.62
Margaret Bolan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.42
Nancy Otterholt
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
Deborah Milter
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
Nan Bettinger
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
2.20
Carrie Toppano
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published 2.5
2.00
Pamela Nelson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
Julie Winkler
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · 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.

Nan Bettinger + Margaret Bolan0832% games−2.6% vs expected
Susan Iverson + Deborah Milter5648% games−4.2% vs expected
Nan Bettinger + Deborah Milter0733% games−4.3% vs expected
Nan Bettinger + Nancy Otterholt5944% games−7.1% vs expected
Margaret Bolan + Nancy Otterholt1940% games−10.3% vs expected
Deborah Milter + Margaret Bolan0727% games−12.4% vs expected
Pamela Nelson + Nancy Otterholt2829% games−12.6% vs expected
Pamela Nelson + Nan Bettinger0622% games−14.6% vs expected
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
Ginny Larsen
128W–82L career · 5 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.23
3
Susan Iverson
31W–24L career · 1 line in 2021
<1%74%26%
2.92
3
Donna Rigas
13W–21L career · type S · 5 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
2.73
3
Margaret Bolan
31W–72L career · 5 lines in 2021
18%82%<1%
2.62
2.5
Nancy Otterholt
26W–65L career · 4 lines in 2021
0%73%27%
2.42
2.5
Deborah Milter
20W–56L career · 4 lines in 2021
not enough data
2.5
Nan Bettinger
17W–54L career · 4 lines in 2021
not enough data
2.5
Carrie Toppano
61W–88L career · 8 lines in 2021
0%99%1%
2.20
2.5
Pamela Nelson
14W–50L career · 4 lines in 2021
0%>99%<1%
2.00
Julie Winkler
13W–30L career · 4 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.