Teams

Martins Dames

Adult 65 & Over · 8.0 Women - Mon

13 players · average NTRP 3.85 / PHILADELPHIA

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2026-08-26vs Frog HollowWon 30
W#1 DoublesVicky Pecunia / Janet Pollan vs VERONICA ELIAS / Janet Lippincott6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesCandia Barry / Kim Ziegler vs Karen Johnstone / Deborah Swiren5-7, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCarol Hunt / Janet O'Brien vs Jane Ferro / Karen Spofford2-6, 7-6, 1-0
2026-08-24vs Frog HollowWon 21
W#1 DoublesLinda Mullin / Janet Pollan vs Deborah Swiren / VERONICA ELIAS6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesKate Pitman / Nan Barash vs Karen Johnstone / Lisa Jablon6-2, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesCarol Hunt / Lois Bartolomei vs Janet Burgoon / Janet Lippincott2-6, 4-6
2026-08-17vs Frog HollowWon 21
W#1 DoublesVicky Pecunia / Janet Pollan vs Deborah Swiren / Janet Lippincott6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesSandra Gilson / Kim Ziegler vs Elaine Asplundh / Lisa Jablon6-7, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLois Bartolomei / Nanette Zucker vs Megan Reddish / Barbara Heck5-7, 3-6
2026-08-03vs Frog HollowWon 30
W#1 DoublesCandia Barry / Kim Ziegler vs VERONICA ELIAS / Tina Test6-1, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesSandra Gilson / Vicky Pecunia vs Janet Lippincott / Deborah Swiren6-2, 2-1
W#3 DoublesNan Barash / Carol Hunt vs Barbara Heck / Karen Spofford6-3, 4-6, 1-0
2026-07-30vs Swinging SeniorsLost 01
L#1 DoublesNan Barash / Stacy Gould vs Elaine Lawrence / Shelley Berger6-3, 1-6, 0-1
2026-07-23vs Swinging SeniorsLost 01
L#1 DoublesNan Barash / Stacy Gould vs Elaine Lawrence / Tina Test2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-07-13vs Frog HollowWon 21
W#1 DoublesCandia Barry / Vicky Pecunia vs VERONICA ELIAS / Lisa Jablon6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesLinda Mullin / Karen Sauer vs Karen Spofford / Carol Leslie6-2, 6-3
L#3 DoublesKate Pitman / Nanette Zucker vs Janet Burgoon / Barbara Heck6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2026-07-09vs Swinging SeniorsLost 01
L#1 DoublesNan Barash / Debra Lorah vs Elaine Lawrence / Tina Test5-7, 3-6
2026-06-29vs Frog HollowWon 30
W#1 DoublesCandia Barry / Sandra Gilson vs Lisa Jablon / Carol Leslie6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesKate Pitman / Karen Sauer vs Janet Burgoon / Tina Test5-7, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesNan Barash / Janet O'Brien vs VERONICA ELIAS / Janet Lippincott6-1, 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 standings2 teams · 8.0 Women - Mon
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Martins Dames0381562
2Frog Hollow031817104

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.59 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.

3.92
Candia Barry
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.86
Vicky Pecunia
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.82
Linda Mullin
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.77
Nan Barash
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.73
Janet Pollan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.60
Sandra Gilson
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.58
Kate Pitman
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.49
Kim Ziegler
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.36
Karen Sauer
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.26
Lois Bartolomei
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
Nanette Zucker
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.07
Carol Hunt
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Janet O'Brien
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.

Lois Bartolomei + Vicky Pecunia19663% games+4.7% vs expected
Janet Pollan + Linda Mullin21859% games+4.6% vs expected
Janet O'Brien + Vicky Pecunia7067% gamesnot enough data
Vicky Pecunia + Kate Pitman4354% gamesnot enough data
Carol Hunt + Candia Barry2342% gamesnot enough data
Vicky Pecunia + Candia Barry5066% gamesnot enough data
Sandra Gilson + Candia Barry314 matchesnot enough data
Nanette Zucker + Candia Barry134 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
Candia Barry
145W–58L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%72%28%
3.92
4
Vicky Pecunia
69W–32L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%86%13%
3.86
4
Linda Mullin
127W–81L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%91%8%
3.82
4
Nan Barash
200W–142L career · 8 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Janet Pollan
129W–154L career · 3 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Sandra Gilson
32W–21L career · 3 lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.60
4
Kate Pitman
12W–12L career · 3 lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
3.58
Kim Ziegler
37W–41L career · 3 lines in 2026
52%48%<1%
3.49
Karen Sauer
31W–38L career · 2 lines in 2026
85%15%<1%
3.36
3.5
Lois Bartolomei
104W–46L career · 5 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Nanette Zucker
15W–21L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Carol Hunt
135W–110L career · 6 lines in 2026
29%71%<1%
3.07
Janet O'Brien
32W–25L 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.