Teams

Montana/Ziegler/55&Over

2025 USTA Adult 55 & Over · Women 9.0 - 55 & Over

8 players · average NTRP 4.33 / MONTANA

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
2025-08-20vs 55s Q TeamWon 21
L#1 DoublesAMY BELLAMAH-DANIEL / Mary Thane vs Elizabeth Brennan / Sherrie Fuller-Benge3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesStacey Ziegler / Ann Waters vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesHeather Silverman / Paige Darden vs Janet Larsh / Stacie Wunsch6-3, 6-2
2025-08-19vs 55s Q TeamWon 21
L#1 DoublesSusie Luebbe / Melissa Clark vs Krista Parham / Emily Hall7-5, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesStacey Ziegler / Ann Waters vs Stacie Wunsch / Katie Bark6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesHeather Silverman / Paige Darden vs Janet Larsh / Kandy Chain6-3, 6-4
2025-08-04vs 55s Q TeamWon 21
L#1 DoublesSusie Luebbe / Melissa Clark vs Michele Hill / Krista Parham7-6, 5-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesStacey Ziegler / Ann Waters vs Stacie Wunsch / Katie Bark6-4, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMary Thane / AMY BELLAMAH-DANIEL vs Elizabeth Brennan / Sherrie Fuller-Benge6-0, 7-6
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 · Women 9.0 - 55 & Over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Montana/Ziegler/55&Over3063667
255s Q Team033614103

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 4.06 estimated across 4 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.

4.25
AMY BELLAMAH-DANIEL
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.16
Heather Silverman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.98
Ann Waters
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.87
Susie Luebbe
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Gina Barham
published
Mary Thane
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Paige Darden
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Stacey Ziegler
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Mary Thane + AMY BELLAMAH-DANIEL7164% gamesnot enough data
Stacey Ziegler + AMY BELLAMAH-DANIEL303 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
AMY BELLAMAH-DANIEL
46W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
4%93%3%
4.25
4.5
Heather Silverman
82W–85L career · 2 lines in 2025
12%87%1%
4.16
4
Ann Waters
25W–15L career · type A · 3 lines in 2025
<1%56%44%
3.98
Susie Luebbe
32W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%82%18%
3.87
Gina Barham
8W–6L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary Thane
17W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Paige Darden
22W–40L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stacey Ziegler
23W–11L career · 2 lines in 2025
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.