Teams

SStover (Southampton)

2026 Adult 65 & Over League · 65 & Over Adult 3.5 Women - Mon AM

14 players · average NTRP 3.21 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-04-13vs LMazigi (Palisades)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesDenise Bost / Valerie Link vs Katherine Hargett / Evelyn Wenzel5-7, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesW Kay Bridges / Susan Stover vs Teresa Brown / Sally Lowrance7-5, 0-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJanice Daniel / Susie McCraney vs Madlen Barnett / Mildred Deely1-6, 2-6
2026-03-30vs JHadley/JNomina (OPRC)Lost 12
W#1 DoublesSarah Terrio / Denise Bost vs Kimberly Godwin / Virginia Herran7-5, 6-2
L#2 DoublesTeri Iezzi / Lisa O'Shea vs Janice Abluton / Jean Sanderson5-7, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesPatrice Forbes / Janet Layne vs Susan Castle / Paula Hoogerland1-6, 2-6
2026-03-23vs SJohnson (WSRC)Won 21
W#1 DoublesTeri Iezzi / Janice Daniel vs Susan Dorton / Sandy Johnson6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesW Kay Bridges / Julia Payne vs Lynn Davis / Kim Bivens6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesColleen Schiavo / Susie McCraney vs Terri Setzer / Nanette Murphy2-6, 7-5, 0-1
2026-03-19vs JSlep (Charlotte Tennis)Won 21
L#1 DoublesTeri Iezzi / Janet Layne vs Joan Slep / Karen Trigg3-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesJulia Payne / Patrice Forbes vs Gillian Murrell / Linda Hindel4-6, 5-3
W#3 DoublesW Kay Bridges / Cindy Wilson vs Toni Evans / Kate Blankenship6-3, 6-2
L#1 DoublesLisa O'Shea / Patrice Forbes vs Deborah Toomey / Margaret MacKie0-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesDenise Bost / Sarah Terrio vs Elaine Myers / Esther Craig3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJanice Daniel / Valerie Link vs Karen Watford / Sharon Wooten4-6, 0-6
2026-03-02vs KKing/CHobson (WSRC)Won 21
L#1 DoublesNancy Christensen / W Kay Bridges vs Diana Gasparro / Cyndie Hobson4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesDenise Bost / Sarah Terrio vs Barbara Northrup / Kathy King6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJanice Daniel / Valerie Link vs Sally Dickson / Chris Marko3-6, 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 standings6 teams · 65 & Over Adult 3.5 Women - Mon AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SWooten/ASykes (Charlotte Tennis NC)601627106
2KKing/CHobson (WSRC)4212613137
3LMazigi (Palisades)4211718154
4SStover (Southampton)3381024181
5JHadley/JNomina (OPRC)2461225176
6SJohnson (WSRC)1531532200

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 3.07 estimated across 14 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.

3.39
Sarah Terrio
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.33
Denise Bost
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.31
Janice Daniel
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.30
W Kay Bridges
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.15
Cindy Wilson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.10
Teri Iezzi
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.06
Julia Payne
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.99
Lisa O'Shea
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.98
Valerie Link
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.92
Patrice Forbes
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.89
Nancy Christensen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.89
Janet Layne
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.85
Susie McCraney
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.79
Colleen Schiavo
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
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.

Sarah Terrio + Denise Bost8162% games+5.6% vs expected
Denise Bost + Valerie Link10654% games−4.0% vs expected
Lisa O'Shea + Denise Bost271058% games−7.8% vs expected
Teri Iezzi + Denise Bost2548% gamesnot enough data
Teri Iezzi + Lisa O'Shea314 matchesnot enough data
Sarah Terrio + Valerie Link224 matchesnot enough data
Janice Daniel + Valerie Link213 matchesnot enough data
W Kay Bridges + Cindy Wilson213 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.

3.5
Sarah Terrio
99W–47L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
3.39
3.5
Denise Bost
205W–139L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.33
Janice Daniel
17W–23L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
W Kay Bridges
6W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.30
3
Cindy Wilson
12W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%14%86%
3.15
3.5
Teri Iezzi
110W–84L career · 3 lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.10
Julia Payne
5W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%32%68%
3.06
3
Lisa O'Shea
83W–55L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
2.99
3
Valerie Link
83W–97L career · type A · 3 lines in 2026
<1%55%45%
2.98
Patrice Forbes
1W–6L career · 3 lines in 2026
71%29%<1%
2.92
Nancy Christensen
4W–3L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%78%22%
2.89
Janet Layne
0W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
78%22%<1%
2.89
Susie McCraney
1W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%85%14%
2.85
3
Colleen Schiavo
3W–3L career · 1 line in 2026
2%91%7%
2.79

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.