Teams

MG - Long

2025 · 2026 Fall USTA 55 & Over Night League

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-10-21Won 10
W#1 DoublesDiane Branch / Conitha King vs Karen Agnello / Kaye Melnick6-4, 2-6, 1-0
2025-10-07Won 10
W#1 DoublesDiane Branch / Elizabeth Doyle vs Joy Darley / Cathy Garner6-3, 7-6
2025-09-30Won 10
W#1 DoublesDiane Branch / Conitha King vs Cathy Garner / Kim McDonald6-3, 6-2
2025-09-16Won 10
W#2 DoublesDiane Branch / Conitha King vs Karen Agnello / Valerie Smedley6-2, 6-2
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 2026 Fall USTA 55 & Over Night League 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 2.94 estimated across 8 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.

3.32
Holly Sharp
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.10
Elizabeth Doyle
usually #4 Doubles 39%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.90
Diane Branch
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.88
Conitha King
usually #2 Doubles 59%, also #1 Doubles 18% · published 3
2.87
Sharon Woernle
usually #2 Doubles 42%, also #3 Doubles 31% · published
2.84
Carla Rush
usually #2 Doubles 61%, also #3 Doubles 28% · published 3
2.82
Regina Dinger
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 18% · published
2.76
Joan Ensley
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 28% · published
Deborah Long
published 3
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.

Regina Dinger + Sharon Woernle5552% games+2.3% vs expected
Joan Ensley + Regina Dinger121647% games+0.2% vs expected
Joan Ensley + Sharon Woernle2543% games−1.5% vs expected
Carla Rush + Conitha King6550% games−3.3% vs expected
Sharon Woernle + Elizabeth Doyle314 matchesnot enough data
Elizabeth Doyle + Holly Sharp213 matchesnot enough data
Carla Rush + Holly Sharp213 matchesnot enough data
Conitha King + Diane Branch303 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.

Holly Sharp
63W–29L career · 27 lines in 2026
1%89%9%
3.32
Elizabeth Doyle
16W–28L career · 18 lines in 2026
24%76%<1%
3.10
3
Diane Branch
5W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%76%24%
2.90
3
Conitha King
21W–23L career · 17 lines in 2026
<1%80%19%
2.88
Sharon Woernle
39W–34L career · 26 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
2.87
3
Carla Rush
26W–41L career · 18 lines in 2026
1%87%13%
2.84
Regina Dinger
40W–57L career · 27 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
2.82
Joan Ensley
37W–60L career · 25 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
2.76
3
Deborah Long
3W–4L career · no lines in 2026
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.