Teams

Cox/META

2026 Adult 40 & Over-META · 3.5 Women

15 players · average NTRP 3.25 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-04-30vs Hagood3.5/METAWon 30
W#1 DoublesDana Wenzell / Ju Mo vs Pam Mobley / Marcia Sentell6-4, 6-4
W#1 SinglesSarah LaGuardia vs Shannon Hinkle6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesLynne Little / Jane Dean vs Robin Dimona / Anita Jilton6-3, 6-4
2026-04-19vs Hagood3.5/METALost 12
L#1 DoublesHolli Cox / Anneke Self vs Mary Warner / Makie Kordamiri4-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesJu Mo vs Anita Jilton6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesJane Dean / Jan Goodsell vs Joan Hagood / Robin Dimona6-7, 3-6
2026-04-12vs Hagood3.5/METAWon 31
W#1 DoublesDana Wenzell / Rachel Fogg vs Pam Mobley / Sandra Cook6-4, 1-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesSarah LaGuardia vs Mary Warner6-1, 6-2
L#2 DoublesKirsten Hoskins / Jane Dean vs Robin Dimona / Theresa Boyd2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesAnneke Self / Holli Cox vs Joan Hagood / Annette Clemons7-6, 2-6, 1-0
2026-04-06vs Hagood3.5/METALost 13
L#1 DoublesLynne Little / Dana Wenzell vs Gail Archer / Marcia Sentell3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#1 SinglesJu Mo vs Shannon Hinkle6-1, 6-0
L#2 DoublesJean Swindle / Keo Jur vs Annette Clemons / Sandra Cook2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAnneke Self / Aileen Frazier vs Pam Mobley / Mary Warner2-6, 0-6
2026-03-23vs Hagood3.5/METALost 13
L#1 DoublesKirsten Hoskins / Keo Jur vs Annette Clemons / Marcia Sentell1-6, 0-6
W#1 SinglesHolli Cox vs Stacey McKenzie6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesJan Goodsell / Jean Swindle vs Sandra Cook / Mary Warner1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesSarah LaGuardia / Mary Jo Sparrow vs Gail Archer / Shannon Hinkle6-7, 0-6
2026-03-22vs Hagood3.5/METALost 03
L#1 DoublesLynne Little / Ju Mo vs Annette Clemons / Sandra Cook4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesKirsten Hoskins / Jan Goodsell vs Gail Archer / Marcia Sentell2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesHolli Cox / Aileen Frazier vs Theresa Boyd / Anita Jilton2-6, 2-6
2026-03-15vs Hagood3.5/METALost 13
L#1 DoublesLynne Little / Sarah LaGuardia vs Gail Archer / Marcia Sentell3-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesHolli Cox vs Shannon Hinkle6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesKirsten Hoskins / Jan Goodsell vs Sandra Cook / Theresa Boyd6-4, 1-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesAileen Frazier / Keo Jur vs Anita Jilton / Mary Warner1-6, 1-6
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 standings for 3.5 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 3.01 estimated across 14 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.

3.34
Rachel Fogg
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.24
Sarah LaGuardia
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.22
Holli Cox
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.17
Ju Mo
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.14
Lynne Little
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.11
Dana Wenzell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.09
Jane Dean
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.06
Keo Jur
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.88
Jean Swindle
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.86
Kirsten Hoskins
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.81
Jan Goodsell
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.80
Mary Jo Sparrow
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.76
Anneke Self
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.65
Aileen Frazier
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Rachel Lovelace
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.

Lynne Little + Sarah LaGuardia6354% games−0.1% vs expected
Jane Dean + Kirsten Hoskins5447% games−6.5% vs expected
Kirsten Hoskins + Jan Goodsell0634% gamesnot enough data
Lynne Little + Jane Dean404 matchesnot enough data
Dana Wenzell + Holli Cox123 matchesnot enough data
Anneke Self + Holli Cox123 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.

Rachel Fogg
5W–4L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%88%12%
3.34
Sarah LaGuardia
18W–23L career · 4 lines in 2026
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Holli Cox
18W–21L career · 5 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.22
Ju Mo
29W–11L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%10%90%
3.17
Lynne Little
36W–21L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%14%86%
3.14
3.5
Dana Wenzell
6W–26L career · 3 lines in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.11
Jane Dean
19W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%25%75%
3.09
Keo Jur
17W–14L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
3.06
Jean Swindle
3W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
82%18%<1%
2.88
Kirsten Hoskins
9W–19L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%86%13%
2.86
Jan Goodsell
2W–15L career · 4 lines in 2026
92%8%<1%
2.81
Mary Jo Sparrow
0W–15L career · 1 line in 2026
94%6%<1%
2.80
3
Anneke Self
8W–11L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%95%3%
2.76
3
Aileen Frazier
0W–5L career · 3 lines in 2026
12%87%<1%
2.65
Rachel Lovelace
10W–17L 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.