Teams

Apex:SterlingSisters:Crosby

2023 ME Adult 55 & Over Women · 6.0 55 & Over Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.25 / MAINE

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2022-12-03vs MP:TheAces:GreenbaumWon 21
W#1 DoublesPatricia Martel-Buxton / Holly Rich vs Wendy Greenbaum / Jane Tuttle6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesWendy Cannon / Lori Nadeau vs Janice Robinson / Carla Dickstein6-4, 6-0
L#3 DoublesMichele Gilfoil / Elizabeth Langham vs Jane Jukes / Nobuko Walek3-6, 2-6
2022-12-03vs Apex:DoubleTrouble:TraillWon 21
L#1 DoublesPatricia Martel-Buxton / Holly Rich vs Julie Faure / Jane Richards6-2, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Langham / Ruth Crosby vs Deb Pert / Marsha Traill6-0, 2-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesDana DeFilippo / Maureen Foster vs Terry Burrows / Catherine Chen7-6, 6-4
2022-11-13vs MP:TheAces:GreenbaumWon 21
L#1 DoublesPamela Elwell / Ruth Crosby vs Wendy Greenbaum / Jane Tuttle3-6, 6-0, 0-1
W#2 DoublesWendy Cannon / Lori Nadeau vs Jane Jukes / Alyson Cummings6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Boucher / Holly Rich vs Elaine Bell / Janice Robinson6-2, 6-1
2022-11-13vs Apex:DoubleTrouble:TraillWon 30
W#1 DoublesPamela Elwell / Andrea Otis-Higgins vs Julie Faure / Terry Burrows6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesDana DeFilippo / Maureen Foster vs Rita Farry / Laurie Piasio6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesRuth Crosby / Wendy Cannon vs MERYL E Nierman / Karen Phillips6-4, 6-2
2022-10-29vs Apex:DoubleTrouble:TraillWon 21
L#1 DoublesPamela Elwell / Ruth Crosby vs Jane Richards / Julie Faure4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesWendy Cannon / Elizabeth Langham vs Terry Burrows / Catherine Chen6-7, 6-0, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAndrea Otis-Higgins / Patricia Martel-Buxton vs Marsha Traill / Margaret Groban6-2, 6-1
2022-10-01vs MP:TheAces:GreenbaumWon 30
W#1 DoublesDana DeFilippo / Maureen Foster vs Wendy Greenbaum / Jane Jukes5-7, 7-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesHolly Rich / Lori Nadeau vs Elaine Bell / Janice Robinson6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMichele Gilfoil / Ruth Crosby vs Alyson Cummings / Nobuko Walek6-4, 6-2
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 standings3 teams · 6.0 55 & Over Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Apex:SterlingSisters:Crosby6014412122
2Apex:DoubleTrouble:Traill236922154
3MP:TheAces:Greenbaum0541124152

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 2.91 estimated across 9 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.

3.12
Pamela Elwell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.07
Dana DeFilippo
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.98
Lori Nadeau
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.96
Patricia Martel-Buxton
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.92
Andrea Otis-Higgins
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.88
Ruth Crosby
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
2.86
Michele Gilfoil
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.69
Elizabeth Langham
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.68
Wendy Cannon
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Elizabeth Boucher
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Holly Rich
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Maureen Foster
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Elizabeth Boucher + Holly Rich7162% games+15.0% vs expected
Patricia Martel-Buxton + Lori Nadeau7066% games+12.8% vs expected
Pamela Elwell + Ruth Crosby7657% games+12.0% vs expected
Elizabeth Boucher + Ruth Crosby5557% games+5.9% vs expected
Holly Rich + Ruth Crosby7269% games+5.2% vs expected
Andrea Otis-Higgins + Ruth Crosby5455% games+2.8% vs expected
Patricia Martel-Buxton + Andrea Otis-Higgins7362% games+0.0% vs expected
Patricia Martel-Buxton + Holly Rich4255% games−1.7% 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.

Pamela Elwell
71W–68L career · 3 lines in 2023
19%80%<1%
3.12
3.5
Dana DeFilippo
35W–35L career · 6 lines in 2023
31%69%<1%
3.07
Lori Nadeau
47W–24L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%54%46%
2.98
Patricia Martel-Buxton
94W–84L career · 6 lines in 2023
<1%60%40%
2.96
3
Andrea Otis-Higgins
137W–135L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%71%29%
2.92
Ruth Crosby
158W–112L career · 7 lines in 2023
<1%81%19%
2.88
Michele Gilfoil
12W–29L career · 2 lines in 2023
1%84%16%
2.86
Elizabeth Langham
67W–63L career · 3 lines in 2023
9%90%1%
2.69
Wendy Cannon
71W–56L career · 4 lines in 2023
10%89%1%
2.68
Elizabeth Boucher
31W–18L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Holly Rich
68W–44L career · 6 lines in 2023
not enough data
Maureen Foster
7W–0L career · 3 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.