Teams

CLBurns (Weddington)

2022 Combo Doubles 40 & Over League · 40 & Over Combo 8.5 Women

12 players · average NTRP 4.25 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2022-10-21vs LCanata (Blakeney)Won 10
W#2 DoublesCynthia Burns / Terri Kimner vs Michelle Wright / Laurie Canata7-5, 6-3
2022-10-11vs MHolland/CFisher (Queens)Lost 01
L#3 DoublesTerri Kimner / Elizabeth McCombs vs Perri Freel / Amy Nielsen2-6, 1-6
2022-09-23vs DVliet (Raintree)Won 10
W#3 DoublesSara Applegate / Kathy Hatt vs Judith Skelton / Donna Savage6-2, 6-1
2022-09-16vs CGreen (Life Time)Won 10
W#2 DoublesElizabeth McCombs / Terri Kimner vs Sandy Mullis / Dora Burdzinska-Drezek6-2, 6-2
2022-08-26vs CSheeler/HPhelps (Firethorne)Won 10
W#1 DoublesKris Schwieger / Sara Applegate vs Megan Noonan / Melissa Spinner6-2, 6-1
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 40 & Over Combo 8.5 Women 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 3.72 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.

Cynthia Burns
published 4.5
4.00
Dorothy Cato
published 4.5
3.94
Elizabeth McCombs
published 4.5
3.86
Victoria Wasulko
published 4
3.76
Sara Applegate
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.75
J Lowe
published 4
3.62
Terri Kimner
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.59
Janet Garvey
published
3.56
Kathleen Griffith
published
3.43
Patti Moser
published
Kris Schwieger
published
Kristen Lyons
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.

Sara Applegate + Janet Garvey5254% games+1.2% vs expected
Victoria Wasulko + Terri Kimner8456% games−2.2% vs expected
Victoria Wasulko + Elizabeth McCombs314 matchesnot enough data
Dorothy Cato + Victoria Wasulko123 matchesnot enough data
Patti Moser + Kathleen Griffith213 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.

4.5
Cynthia Burns
0W–2L career · type S · no lines in 2022
not enough data
4.5
Dorothy Cato
53W–35L career · no lines in 2022
49%51%<1%
4.00
4.5
Elizabeth McCombs
19W–28L career · no lines in 2022
67%33%<1%
3.94
4
Victoria Wasulko
47W–24L career · no lines in 2022
<1%86%14%
3.86
4
Sara Applegate
91W–46L career · 5 lines in 2022
2%94%3%
3.76
4
J Lowe
12W–4L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.75
Terri Kimner
43W–42L career · 3 lines in 2022
18%82%<1%
3.62
Janet Garvey
17W–15L career · no lines in 2022
25%75%<1%
3.59
Kathleen Griffith
15W–23L career · no lines in 2022
32%68%<1%
3.56
Patti Moser
7W–9L career · no lines in 2022
72%28%<1%
3.43
Kris Schwieger
1W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Kristen Lyons
8W–2L 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.