Teams

Clancy/Varner 40s 3.5

2022 Piedmont USTA 40 & Over · WOMEN 3.5 40 & Over

15 players · average NTRP 3.42 / NORTH CAROLINA

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 →
Schedule2 played
2022-04-21vs Womack 40s 3.5Won 10
W#1 DoublesDebbie Clancy / Serena Igharas vs Kim Hunt / Lisa Liringis6-3, 6-7, 1-0
2022-03-24Won 10
W#3 DoublesDebbie Clancy / Serena Igharas vs Melissa Baker / Claudia Rodriguez6-7, 7-5, 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 WOMEN 3.5 40 & 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 3.31 estimated across 14 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.

3.74
Stephanie Bettinger
published
3.54
Natalie Harris
published
3.53
Teresa Cruz
published
3.49
Andrea Sweat
published 3.5
3.46
Elisabeth Kraska
published 3.5
3.42
Betty Kramer
published 3.5
3.38
Debbie Clancy
published 3.5
3.37
Lynette Paley
published
3.32
Serena Igharas
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.31
Stacey Russo
published
3.08
Sonia Haslam
published
2.99
Sandy Cathers
published
2.86
Brenda Varner
published 3
2.83
Linda Chapman
published
Wimberly Jessup
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.

Debbie Clancy + Teresa Cruz5358% games+7.3% vs expected
Elisabeth Kraska + Stephanie Bettinger4356% games+2.8% vs expected
Andrea Sweat + Natalie Harris213 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.

Stephanie Bettinger
26W–18L career · no lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.74
Natalie Harris
48W–26L career · no lines in 2022
<1%38%62%
3.54
Teresa Cruz
28W–8L career · no lines in 2022
<1%40%60%
3.53
3.5
Andrea Sweat
26W–20L career · no lines in 2022
<1%53%47%
3.49
3.5
Elisabeth Kraska
44W–25L career · no lines in 2022
<1%61%39%
3.46
3.5
Betty Kramer
15W–14L career · no lines in 2022
<1%74%26%
3.42
3.5
Debbie Clancy
32W–30L career · no lines in 2022
<1%83%17%
3.38
Lynette Paley
8W–11L career · no lines in 2022
<1%85%15%
3.37
3.5
Serena Igharas
149W–124L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%91%8%
3.32
Stacey Russo
21W–18L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%7%
3.31
Sonia Haslam
15W–13L career · no lines in 2022
<1%28%72%
3.08
Sandy Cathers
25W–17L career · no lines in 2022
<1%53%47%
2.99
3
Brenda Varner
138W–88L career · no lines in 2022
<1%85%14%
2.86
Linda Chapman
8W–15L career · no lines in 2022
1%90%9%
2.83
Wimberly Jessup
2W–0L career · no lines in 2022
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.