Teams

YORK:Kraus:Billip

2026 NH Adult 65 & Over Women Day · 7.0 Women 1

17 players · average NTRP 3.17 / NEW HAMPSHIRE

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-06-25vs MTS:DeucesAreWild:Frawley:HelmeWon 21
W#1 DoublesBarbara Green / Margie Carley vs Lois Nardo / Jane Frawley6-1, 6-1
L#2 DoublesDana Foster / Elaine Epstein vs Cathleen Desmarais / Rebecca Helme6-7, 4-6
W#3 DoublesGinger Kraus / Karen Billipp vs Lynn Dolan / Susan Johanson6-3, 7-5
L#1 DoublesKaren Billipp / Regina Lammers vs Caren Steele / Joyce Sylvester3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesGinger Kraus / Roberta Sullivan vs Jennifer Correia / Marilyn Elsmore3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesElaine Epstein / Maryellen Jendzejec vs Nancy Tothill / Robin Albaneze6-4, 1-6, 0-1
W#1 DoublesDana Foster / Margie Carley vs Marilyn Elsmore / Donna Harrigan6-3, 7-6
L#2 DoublesElaine Epstein / Ginger Kraus vs Roberta Moore / Tammie Tischler2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesTherese Wallace / Elyssa DelValle vs PETRICE RANNO / Kathleen McGann4-6, 3-6
2026-06-04vs MTS:DeucesAreWild:Frawley:HelmeWon 21
W#1 DoublesElaine Epstein / Barbara Green vs Lynn Dolan / Debi Seamans6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesTannye Wold / Ginger Kraus vs Sharon Goolbis / Rebecca Helme6-1, 0-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKaren Billipp / Dana Foster vs Susan Johanson / Nancy Stehno7-5, 6-2
2026-05-07vs MTS:DeucesAreWild:Frawley:HelmeLost 03
L#1 DoublesGinger Kraus / Regina Lammers vs Jane Frawley / Lois Nardo3-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesRoberta Sullivan / Phyllis Mastroianni vs Rebecca Helme / Lynn Dolan4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesElyssa DelValle / Sarah Naphen vs Marie Stevens / Nancy Stehno0-6, 3-6
L#1 DoublesBarbara Green / Ginger Kraus vs Patricia Clauss / Nancy Tothill5-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesElaine Epstein / Elyssa DelValle vs Jennifer Correia / Caren Steele1-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesRegina Lammers / Margaret Rath vs PETRICE RANNO / Kathleen McGann0-6, 6-3, 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 standings3 teams · 7.0 Women 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1GH:TripleTroublemakers:Sylvester:Tothill0614412146
2YORK:Kraus:Billip0661225180
3MTS:DeucesAreWild:Frawley:Helme0671126192

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 2.93 estimated across 13 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.

3.27
Margaret Galligan
published
3.27
Margie Carley
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.26
Tannye Wold
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Dana Foster
published 3.5
3.18
Roberta Sullivan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.16
Barbara Green
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.94
Ginger Kraus
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published 3
2.88
Therese Wallace
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.88
Karen Billipp
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
2.83
Margaret Rath
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.76
Fern Phillips
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.65
Elaine Epstein
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3
2.63
Elyssa DelValle
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.40
Phyllis Mastroianni
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Maryellen Jendzejec
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Regina Lammers
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Sarah Naphen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Elyssa DelValle + Elaine Epstein2343% games+2.7% vs expected
Margaret Galligan + Barbara Green4252% games−3.3% vs expected
Tannye Wold + Barbara Green3538% games−12.0% vs expected
Tannye Wold + Karen Billipp3250% gamesnot enough data
Roberta Sullivan + Margie Carley314 matchesnot enough data
Margie Carley + Barbara Green224 matchesnot enough data
Tannye Wold + Roberta Sullivan213 matchesnot enough data
Fern Phillips + Phyllis Mastroianni033 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.

Margaret Galligan
24W–33L career · no lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.27
Margie Carley
25W–37L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.27
Tannye Wold
37W–49L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Dana Foster
9W–12L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Roberta Sullivan
58W–43L career · 2 lines in 2026
9%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Barbara Green
71W–73L career · 3 lines in 2026
11%88%<1%
3.16
3
Ginger Kraus
34W–67L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
2.94
Therese Wallace
19W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%82%18%
2.88
Karen Billipp
54W–66L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%83%17%
2.88
Margaret Rath
13W–14L career · 1 line in 2026
1%90%10%
2.83
3
Fern Phillips
33W–44L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
2.76
3
Elaine Epstein
18W–35L career · 6 lines in 2026
13%87%<1%
2.65
3
Elyssa DelValle
32W–57L career · 3 lines in 2026
15%85%<1%
2.63
Phyllis Mastroianni
21W–44L career · 1 line in 2026
77%23%<1%
2.40
Maryellen Jendzejec
27W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Regina Lammers
21W–32L career · 6 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sarah Naphen
2W–11L career · 1 line 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.