Teams

SH - Garrison

2025 Fall 55 & Over 3.0 - 4.0, 9.0 · 4.0 Adult 55 Women

7 players · average NTRP 4.00 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2024-10-26vs SH - Beattie 55Won 20
W#1 DoublesDiana McCutcheon / Sharon Garrison vs Shelia Brumbalow / Donna Garner6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesCindy Humphries / Jana Killen vs Marsha Horton / Melissa Irvin6-0, 6-1
2024-10-18vs SH - Beattie 55Won 30
W#1 DoublesMelissa Young / Donna Barksdale vs Dina Beattie / Elaine Vaughn6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesSharon Garrison / Jana Killen vs Jeanne Self / Shelia Brumbalow6-0, 6-3
W#3 DoublesCynthia Fennel / Cindy Humphries vs Donna Garner / Marsha Horton6-1, 6-1
2024-10-12vs SH - Beattie 55Won 20
W#1 DoublesSharon Garrison / Donna Barksdale vs Melissa Irvin / Marsha Horton6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDaphne Jones / Diana McCutcheon vs Donna Garner / Shelia Brumbalow7-6, 6-1
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 4.0 Adult 55 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 3.46 estimated across 5 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.

Cindy Humphries
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
Daphne Jones
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.65
Sharon Garrison
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.53
Cynthia Fennel
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.42
Donna Barksdale
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.37
Jana Killen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.34
Diana McCutcheon
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
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.

Cynthia Fennel + Sharon Garrison19663% games+13.8% vs expected
Diana McCutcheon + Cynthia Fennel6254% games+9.6% vs expected
Jana Killen + Sharon Garrison6165% games+1.7% vs expected
Jana Killen + Donna Barksdale404 matchesnot enough data
Jana Killen + Cynthia Fennel404 matchesnot enough data
Diana McCutcheon + Sharon Garrison303 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
Cindy Humphries
5W–2L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Daphne Jones
6W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Sharon Garrison
103W–27L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%<1%>99%
3.65
4
Cynthia Fennel
52W–23L career · 1 line in 2025
41%59%<1%
3.53
Donna Barksdale
43W–19L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%<1%>99%
3.42
Jana Killen
55W–18L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%<1%>99%
3.37
4
Diana McCutcheon
30W–29L career · 2 lines in 2025
88%12%<1%
3.34

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.