Teams

Olympic 1

2025 SUMMER 65&O Women · Summer 8.0W

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / OHIO VALLEY

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-07-30vs Olympic 2Won 10
W#2 DoublesLaura Pisciotta / Ellen Schmidt vs Blythe Brown / Janet Craycraft6-2, 2-6, 1-0
2025-07-09Won 10
W#3 DoublesEllen Schmidt / Barbara Wiese vs Deborah Ellis / Donna Morley1-6, 6-4, 1-0
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 · Summer 8.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Olympic 15112614125
2Olympic 21561226179

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 3.64 estimated across 6 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.

4.05
Kathleen Kinnard
published
3.92
Lois Dosky
published
3.50
Janet Disbennett
published
3.48
Barbara Wiese
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.45
Ellen Schmidt
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.44
Martha Pfeifer
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Kathy Ruoff
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Laura Pisciotta
published
Leanna Cempre
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Mary Drennen
published
Mary Jane Hamilton
published
Nancy Lucas
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.

Mary Drennen + Kathy Ruoff4448% gamesnot enough data
Leanna Cempre + Kathy Ruoff4447% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Lucas + Kathleen Kinnard6266% gamesnot enough data
Mary Drennen + Barbara Wiese0636% gamesnot enough data
Leanna Cempre + Barbara Wiese3345% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Lucas + Barbara Wiese1533% gamesnot enough data
Mary Drennen + Martha Pfeifer303 matchesnot enough data
Nancy Lucas + Martha Pfeifer033 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.

Kathleen Kinnard
97W–29L career · no lines in 2025
35%65%<1%
4.05
Lois Dosky
136W–50L career · no lines in 2025
<1%72%27%
3.92
Janet Disbennett
122W–76L career · no lines in 2025
51%49%<1%
3.50
3.5
Barbara Wiese
58W–79L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%56%43%
3.48
Ellen Schmidt
115W–89L career · 2 lines in 2025
65%35%<1%
3.45
Martha Pfeifer
108W–120L career · 2 lines in 2025
68%32%<1%
3.44
Kathy Ruoff
35W–38L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Laura Pisciotta
12W–15L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Leanna Cempre
14W–30L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary Drennen
9W–19L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary Jane Hamilton
38W–35L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Nancy Lucas
10W–24L career · no lines in 2025
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.