Teams

ShokesFuller/CCC/foothills

2022 Foothills Combo Doubles - 40 & over · 6.5 Combo Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2022-10-13Won 10
W#2 DoublesKaren Shokes / Kelli Schmidt vs Ryan Lovern / Jennifer Graham6-3, 6-2
2022-10-06Split 11
L#1 DoublesSondra Simmons / Denise Moose vs Marsha Diamonti / Mindy Bolick7-5, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesCarson Helsper / Olivia Good vs Holly Barefoot / Rosemary Skoog4-6, 6-2, 1-0
2022-09-22Lost 01
L#2 DoublesCarson Helsper / Olivia Good vs Linda Shuford / Sandi Horyza5-7, 4-6
2022-09-15vs Gates/CRCC/FoothillsWon 10
W#1 DoublesSondra Simmons / Denise Moose vs Michelle Huffman / Crystal Dula6-2, 6-3
2022-09-08vs Kim/RBCC/FoothillsSplit 11
W#2 DoublesKaren Shokes / Kelli Schmidt vs Devon Stamey / Amy Cody6-4, 6-3
L#3 DoublesMaria Sherrill / Denise Moose vs DeAnna Finger / Misha Ahern2-6, 1-6
2022-09-01vs Place/HCP/FoothillsSplit 11
L#1 DoublesKelli Schmidt / Sondra Simmons vs Lynne Place / Julie Wilson4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesCarson Helsper / Olivia Good vs Jennifer Dufour / Ellen Stupka7-5, 7-5
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 6.5 Combo 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 3.13 estimated across 10 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.

3.66
3.56
Kelli Schmidt
published
3.45
Carson Helsper
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.29
Elise Wright
published 3.5
3.17
Karen Shokes
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.17
Sondra Simmons
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.08
Denise Moose
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.67
Maria Sherrill
published
2.66
Olivia Good
published
2.61
DEBORAH OBERLE
published 3
Rhonda Laxton
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.

Denise Moose + Sondra Simmons41042% games−8.9% vs expected
Karen Shokes + Sondra Simmons1536% gamesnot 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
Charlotte Hartman
10W–13L career · no lines in 2022
11%88%<1%
3.66
Kelli Schmidt
9W–11L career · no lines in 2022
32%68%<1%
3.56
3.5
Carson Helsper
144W–110L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%64%36%
3.45
3.5
Elise Wright
14W–6L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.29
3.5
Karen Shokes
176W–86L career · 2 lines in 2022
10%90%1%
3.17
3.5
Sondra Simmons
157W–103L career · 3 lines in 2022
10%90%1%
3.17
3.5
Denise Moose
52W–62L career · 3 lines in 2022
26%74%<1%
3.08
Maria Sherrill
2W–6L career · no lines in 2022
10%90%1%
2.67
Olivia Good
9W–13L career · no lines in 2022
11%88%<1%
2.66
3
DEBORAH OBERLE
3W–16L career · no lines in 2022
20%80%<1%
2.61
Rhonda Laxton
1W–1L 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.