Teams

Ta.LeFevre55T

2024 Capital Tri-Level 55 & Over · 3.0-3.5-4.0 Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2024-08-01vs Ca.Conzola55TLost 03
L#1 DoublesRegina Heroux / Andrea McCartney vs Lisa Kempf / Theresa Stone4-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDeb Lanier / Tara LeFevre vs Camille Conzola / Karen Thurston4-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesStephanie Lee / Kathleen Serow vs Myra Peterson / Suzanne Ruggles3-6, 3-6
2024-07-18vs Le.Magee55TSplit 11
W#1 DoublesDiane Werner / Andrea McCartney vs Fran Ange / Lynne Manweiler6-4, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesStephanie Lee / Laurene Fitzgerald vs Pam Weis / Laura Bell7-6, 3-6, 0-1
2024-07-11vs Ca.Conzola55TLost 02
L#2 DoublesDeb Lanier / Takako Schenberger vs Marina Barthalmus / Jane Hunter3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesKathy Bostrom / Kim Hopkins vs Marie Gelston / Myra Peterson3-6, 4-6
2024-06-27vs Le.Magee55TWon 21
W#1 DoublesAndrea McCartney / Deb Skiko vs Fran Ange / Cindy Faltisco6-3, 6-2
L#2 DoublesTara LeFevre / Kellie Snider vs Sarah Schmalz / Susanne Knowles4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesLaurene Fitzgerald / Stephanie Lee vs Joy Cooper / Pam Weis6-4, 6-2
2024-06-20vs Ca.Conzola55TSplit 11
W#1 DoublesAndrea McCartney / Regina Heroux vs Laura Davidson / Sindee Simon7-5, 7-6
L#3 DoublesKim Hopkins / Kathleen Serow vs Hope Graney / Suzanne Ruggles6-7, 4-6
2024-06-06vs Le.Magee55TWon 21
W#1 DoublesSusan Fanelly / Diane Werner vs Lynne Manweiler / Sarah Mulligan6-3, 6-0
W#2 DoublesMartha Funsten / Deb Lanier vs Susanne Knowles / Ann Willard6-4, 7-6
L#3 DoublesKathy Bostrom / Kim Hopkins vs Christine Panzl / Laura Bell2-6, 5-7
2024-06-06vs Ca.Conzola55TWon 30
W#1 DoublesAndrea McCartney / Deb Skiko vs Patrice Dovel / Theresa Stone6-0, 6-1
W#2 DoublesTara LeFevre / Kellie Snider vs Jane Hunter / Karen Thurston4-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKathy Bostrom / Kim Hopkins vs Suzanne Ruggles / Carolyn Elliott6-2, 6-3
2024-05-29vs Le.Magee55TLost 12
W#1 DoublesSusan Fanelly / Diane Werner vs Leigh Magee / Lynne Manweiler6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesTara LeFevre / Takako Schenberger vs Heidi Duggins / Sarah Schmalz0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesLaurene Fitzgerald / Stephanie Lee vs Sarah Glover / Christine Panzl4-6, 6-1, 0-1
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 3.0-3.5-4.0 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 3.21 estimated across 11 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.

3.85
Susan Fanelly
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.56
Deb Lanier
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.53
Andrea McCartney
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.51
Deb Skiko
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.19
Takako Schenberger
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.14
Tara LeFevre
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.14
Kellie Snider
published
2.86
Kathy Bostrom
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.85
Kim Hopkins
published
2.84
Laurene Fitzgerald
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.83
Kathleen Serow
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Regina Heroux
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.

Tara LeFevre + Kellie Snider2648% games+0.5% vs expected
Susan Fanelly + Deb Lanier12268% games−2.6% vs expected
Takako Schenberger + Deb Lanier27561% games−3.1% vs expected
Tara LeFevre + Deb Lanier14559% gamesnot enough data
Takako Schenberger + Tara LeFevre10653% gamesnot enough data
Susan Fanelly + Andrea McCartney6160% gamesnot enough data
Andrea McCartney + Deb Skiko5156% gamesnot enough data
Deb Skiko + Tara LeFevre2352% 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
Susan Fanelly
265W–92L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%87%12%
3.85
3.5
Deb Lanier
488W–223L career · type A · 3 lines in 2024
<1%33%67%
3.56
4
Andrea McCartney
146W–107L career · 5 lines in 2024
41%59%<1%
3.53
4
Deb Skiko
110W–112L career · 2 lines in 2024
46%54%<1%
3.51
3.5
Takako Schenberger
243W–154L career · 2 lines in 2024
7%92%1%
3.19
3.5
Tara LeFevre
199W–175L career · 4 lines in 2024
13%86%<1%
3.14
Kellie Snider
4W–11L career · no lines in 2024
15%85%<1%
3.14
3
Kathy Bostrom
57W–84L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%85%15%
2.86
Kim Hopkins
12W–9L career · no lines in 2024
<1%87%13%
2.85
3
Laurene Fitzgerald
101W–157L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%88%11%
2.84
3
Kathleen Serow
132W–119L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%90%9%
2.83
Regina Heroux
0W–2L career · no lines in 2024
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.