Teams

Gould/DV/Foothills

2023 Foothills Spring 40 & Over League · Women 4.0

11 players · average NTRP 4.06 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2023-05-11vs Morin/LHCC/FoothillsWon 30
W#1 DoublesKendra Gould / Meghan Copley vs Angelia Sills / Kate Ashworth6-0, 6-4
W#2 DoublesKimberly Church / Amanda Berry vs Blair Tate / Sunday Richardson6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAllison Meade / Mandy Poplin vs Candace Scott / Michelle Hunt4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2023-05-04vs Walker/HCP/FoothillsWon 31
L#1 DoublesKimberly Church / Mary Sheryl Horine vs Kristina Abee / Tammy Dennis3-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesJennifer Pillow vs Nancy James6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesCarol Almond / Amanda Berry vs Connie Kleeves / Marian Erikson6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKendra Gould / Mandy Poplin vs Carson Helsper / Sarah Wohlbruck6-2, 2-6, 1-0
2023-04-27vs Tonks/YMCA/FoothillsWon 20
W#2 DoublesAllison Meade / Mandy Poplin vs Karen Tonks / Allison Holtzman6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAmanda Berry / Mary Sheryl Horine vs Marsha Diamonti / Linda Shuford6-1, 6-0
2023-04-20vs Morin/LHCC/FoothillsSplit 22
W#1 DoublesLindsey Linker / Amanda Berry vs Kirsten Morin / Alisa Crooks6-2, 7-5
L#1 SinglesMeghan Copley vs Irma Laney0-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesKendra Gould / Mary Sheryl Horine vs Saundra Denny / Angelia Sills7-5, 6-4
L#3 DoublesKatherine Beekman / Jennifer Pillow vs Deirdre Bolter / Sunday Richardson7-5, 4-6, 0-1
2023-04-06vs Walker/HCP/FoothillsWon 30
W#1 SinglesMeghan Copley vs Carson Helsper6-2, 6-0
W#2 DoublesCarol Almond / Amanda Berry vs Jeanne Ann Lewis / Marian Erikson6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesMary Sheryl Horine / Mandy Poplin vs Connie Kleeves / Nancy James6-4, 6-1
2023-03-30vs Tonks/YMCA/FoothillsWon 20
W#1 SinglesMeghan Copley vs Ellen Stupka6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKendra Gould / Amanda Berry vs Megan Reid / Kelli Schmidt6-2, 6-3
2023-03-23vs Morin/LHCC/FoothillsWon 30
W#1 DoublesAmanda Berry / Kimberly Church vs Angelia Sills / Saundra Denny3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMary Sheryl Horine / Allison Meade vs Kirsten Morin / Alisa Crooks6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesCarol Almond / Blythe Parker vs Sunday Richardson / Blair Tate6-2, 3-6, 1-0
2023-03-16vs Walker/HCP/FoothillsWon 21
W#1 SinglesJennifer Pillow vs Kelly Walker6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAmanda Berry / Mandy Poplin vs Susan Ottofaro Ray / Connie Kleeves4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesKendra Gould / Sarah Murphy vs Betty Mahoney / Tracy Kiefer6-1, 6-3
2023-03-09vs Tonks/YMCA/FoothillsWon 20
W#1 SinglesJennifer Pillow vs Kelli Schmidt6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesAmanda Berry / Mandy Poplin vs Kimberly Steele / Weena Gonzalez6-1, 6-4
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 4.0 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 3.82 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.

4.12
Blythe Parker
published 4
4.07
Amanda Berry
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.00
Mary Sheryl Horine
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.84
Carol Almond
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.80
Jennifer Pillow
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.73
Mandy Poplin
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.70
Meghan Copley
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.65
Kendra Gould
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.45
Kimberly Church
published
Katherine Beekman
published
Lindsey Linker
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.

Meghan Copley + Mandy Poplin8165% games+13.3% vs expected
Carol Almond + Amanda Berry16657% games+9.0% vs expected
Carol Almond + Mary Sheryl Horine28961% games−2.1% vs expected
Amanda Berry + Mandy Poplin9171% gamesnot enough data
Jennifer Pillow + Mandy Poplin4548% gamesnot enough data
Kendra Gould + Mary Sheryl Horine4359% gamesnot enough data
Kendra Gould + Amanda Berry5265% gamesnot enough data
Carol Almond + Kendra Gould224 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
Blythe Parker
3W–0L career · no lines in 2023
<1%19%81%
4.12
4.5
Amanda Berry
156W–74L career · 9 lines in 2023
30%70%<1%
4.07
4
Mary Sheryl Horine
71W–25L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%49%51%
4.00
4
Carol Almond
117W–59L career · 3 lines in 2023
1%87%13%
3.84
4
Jennifer Pillow
79W–40L career · 4 lines in 2023
2%91%7%
3.80
4
Mandy Poplin
124W–71L career · 6 lines in 2023
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Meghan Copley
62W–45L career · 4 lines in 2023
7%91%2%
3.70
4
Kendra Gould
51W–37L career · 5 lines in 2023
14%85%1%
3.65
Kimberly Church
10W–11L career · no lines in 2023
63%37%<1%
3.45
Katherine Beekman
1W–1L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Lindsey Linker
0W–1L 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.