Teams

IRV-Vickers/Scotten

2023 Adult 70 & Over · Women

15 players · average NTRP / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2023-08-16vs MAC-Rogovoy/MesherWon 10
W#2 DoublesMary Knocke / Laney Kibel vs Barbara Friesen / Marilyn Soljaga6-2, 6-1
2023-06-29vs VTC-DybdahlWon 10
W#2 DoublesDonna Keller / Laney Kibel vs Mary Russell / Janine Hook6-0, 4-6, 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 standings10 teams · Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1PT&E/SJRC-Edwardsen/Todd7221616204
2VTC-Dybdahl63171021191
3MPRC-Herbert6318922219
4MV-Derby/Pasmore6318923200
5LOTC-Rodegerdts54131428235
6WHRC-MacPherson54141329219
7MPRC-Turchi/Gardner54141334258
8MAC-Rogovoy/Mesher3681940288
9IRV-Vickers/Scotten2781941271
10THPRD-Thorsen0942346293

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.

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.

Carol Chadwick
published
Carol Davidson
published
Donna Keller
published
Janice Harvey
published
Kathryn Scotten
published
Laney Kibel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Lindy Delf
published
Martha DeLong
published
Mary Knocke
published
Mary Mountain
published
Patricia Hougland
published
Sarah Chung
published
Shelley Stoffer
published
Sherry Williamson
published
Stephanie Vickers
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.

Sarah Chung + Mary Knocke1639% gamesnot enough data
Mary Knocke + Sherry Williamson5259% gamesnot enough data
Patricia Hougland + Martha DeLong1427% gamesnot enough data
Stephanie Vickers + Carol Davidson224 matchesnot enough data
Patricia Hougland + Kathryn Scotten134 matchesnot enough data
Janice Harvey + Donna Keller404 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Vickers + Janice Harvey033 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Vickers + Laney Kibel123 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.

Carol Chadwick
1W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Carol Davidson
4W–9L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Donna Keller
7W–1L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Janice Harvey
10W–11L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Kathryn Scotten
2W–4L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Laney Kibel
12W–16L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Lindy Delf
1W–3L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Martha DeLong
2W–9L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Mary Knocke
8W–18L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Mary Mountain
3W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Patricia Hougland
2W–11L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Sarah Chung
5W–15L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Shelley Stoffer
0W–3L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Sherry Williamson
14W–16L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Stephanie Vickers
14W–12L career · no 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.