Teams

Team Hodge

2026 NMI Adult 40&O · 2026 NMI Adult 40&O 4.0W

12 players · average NTRP 3.69 / NORTHERN MICHIGAN

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 →
Schedule3 played
2026-01-11vs Team Rindfusz/GuthrieWon 32
L#1 DoublesBarbara Hodge / Julie Conley vs Melanie LaFave / Judith McDonagh2-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesAmy MacKay vs Susan Lahti3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesJulie Beeker / Phoebe Hodge vs Denise Urban / Christy Pritchett7-5, 6-2
W#3 DoublesDiane Lindquist / Nancy Schaefer vs Elizabeth Thomas / Sherry Guthrie6-3, 6-7, 1-0
W#4 DoublesAnn Mason / Margaret Fedder vs Missy Fitzgerald / Taylor Oberman6-3, 6-2
2026-01-10vs Team Rindfusz/GuthrieLost 23
L#1 DoublesCarey Tafelsky / Margaret Fedder vs Melanie LaFave / Rebecca Friske1-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesDarlene Germaine vs Susan Lahti0-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesPhoebe Hodge / Julie Conley vs Judith McDonagh / Denise Urban6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesAnn Mason / Nancy Schaefer vs Sherry Guthrie / Jackie Rindfusz3-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#4 DoublesDiane Lindquist / Barbara Hodge vs Jennifer Buck / Taylor Oberman6-1, 6-3
2026-01-10vs Team Rindfusz/GuthrieLost 05
L#1 DoublesJulie Conley / Phoebe Hodge vs Sherry Guthrie / Judith McDonagh6-7, 6-3, 0-1
L#1 SinglesBarbara Hodge vs Christy Pritchett5-7, 0-6
L#2 DoublesCarey Tafelsky / Margaret Fedder vs Rebecca Friske / Jackie Rindfusz6-4, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesDarlene Germaine / Amy MacKay vs Melanie LaFave / Missy Fitzgerald3-6, 6-7
L#4 DoublesJulie Beeker / Ann Mason vs Elizabeth Thomas / Jennifer Buck4-6, 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 standings2 teams · 2026 NMI Adult 40&O 4.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Team Rindfusz/Guthrie2110513128
2Team Hodge1251021147

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 3.55 estimated across 10 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.

3.85
Carey Tafelsky
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
Diane Wheelock
published 4
3.74
Barbara Hodge
usually #4 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.71
Margaret Fedder
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #4 Doubles 33% · published
3.61
Phoebe Hodge
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.54
Julie Conley
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.52
Ann Mason
usually #4 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.43
Diane Lindquist
usually #4 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.39
Julie Beeker
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #4 Doubles 50% · published
3.39
Amy MacKay
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.33
Darlene Germaine
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Nancy Schaefer
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.

Carey Tafelsky + Margaret Fedder3347% games+2.2% vs expected
Barbara Hodge + Diane Wheelock134 matchesnot enough data
Julie Beeker + Phoebe Hodge303 matchesnot enough data
Julie Beeker + Diane Lindquist123 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.

4
Carey Tafelsky
7W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%87%13%
3.85
4
Diane Wheelock
2W–9L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
4
Barbara Hodge
11W–33L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%95%2%
3.74
Margaret Fedder
36W–21L career · 3 lines in 2026
5%94%1%
3.71
3.5
Phoebe Hodge
77W–57L career · type A · 3 lines in 2026
<1%21%79%
3.61
Julie Conley
2W–6L career · 3 lines in 2026
36%64%<1%
3.54
3.5
Ann Mason
12W–4L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
<1%45%55%
3.52
3.5
Diane Lindquist
8W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%71%29%
3.43
Julie Beeker
25W–23L career · 2 lines in 2026
81%19%<1%
3.39
3.5
Amy MacKay
10W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
3.39
3.5
Darlene Germaine
21W–22L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.33
Nancy Schaefer
6W–10L career · no lines in 2026
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.