Teams

Cobb/55/3.5/W/WTCA

2025 OG · LP Adult 55 & Over - Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.50 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-02-24vs Hamilton/55/3.5/W/WCTALost 12
L#1 DoublesLisa Edwards / Jane Jarrett vs Debra Cox / Anita House4-8
W#2 DoublesDianne Graham / Becky McCain vs Laura Bennett / Sheri Pippin8-2
L#3 DoublesVirginia Eddleman / Debbie Barthel vs Sherry Hamilton / Lisa Johnson4-8
2025-02-24vs Hamilton/55/3.5/W/WCTALost 12
L#1 DoublesDebbie Barthel / Virginia Eddleman vs Sherry Hamilton / Lisa Johnson4-8
L#2 DoublesBecky McCain / Dianne Graham vs Christy Brown / Martha Lancaster3-8
W#3 DoublesLisa Edwards / Marsha Cobb vs Dana Dukes / Laura Bennett8-3
2025-02-24vs Hamilton/55/3.5/W/WCTALost 03
L#1 DoublesLisa Edwards / Jane Jarrett vs Christy Brown / Martha Lancaster4-8
L#2 DoublesMarsha Cobb / Dianne Graham vs Debra Cox / Dana Dukes2-8
L#3 DoublesBecky McCain / Virginia Eddleman vs Anita House / Sheri Pippin4-8
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 · LP Adult 55 & Over - Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Hamilton/55/3.5/W/WCTA3072241
2Cobb/55/3.5/W/WTCA0327761

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 3.32 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.

3.49
Jane Jarrett
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.40
Debbie Barthel
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.30
Dianne Graham
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Becky McCain
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Dinah Singer
published 3.5
3.23
Marsha Cobb
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.15
Virginia Eddleman
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · 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.

Debbie Barthel + Jane Jarrett12269% games+8.7% vs expected
Virginia Eddleman + Dianne Graham3544% games−2.2% vs expected
Marsha Cobb + Dianne Graham044 matchesnot enough data
Dianne Graham + Jane Jarrett303 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.

Jane Jarrett
16W–4L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%52%48%
3.49
3.5
Debbie Barthel
13W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Dianne Graham
12W–16L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.30
3.5
Becky McCain
3W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Dinah Singer
5W–4L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Marsha Cobb
5W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
98%2%<1%
3.23
Virginia Eddleman
12W–10L career · 3 lines in 2025
12%88%<1%
3.15

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.