Teams

Chatham/40's/4.0/FAC Day

2026 Man · Cov Adult 40 & Over - Women Day

12 players · average NTRP 4.00 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule
Flight standings3 teams · Cov Adult 40 & Over - Women Day
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Chatham/40's/4.0/FAC Day6020414165
2Daskalova/40's/4.0/BC Day33111327207
3Downing/40's/4.0/SC Day0651938246

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 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.

3.81
Carolyn Kalman
usually #2 Doubles 37%, also #3 Doubles 32% · published 4
3.73
Debbie Burkhalter
usually #1 Doubles 62%, also #2 Doubles 23% · published 4
3.68
Amy Bergeron
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.54
Charlotte Scott
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.46
Debra Ethridge
usually #2 Doubles 39%, also #1 Doubles 39% · published 4
Erika Rase
usually #2 Doubles 69%, also #3 Doubles 23% · published
Julie Oubre
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Melissa Verges
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published
Michaela Franklin
usually #1 Singles 56%, also #1 Doubles 19% · published
Shelley Sisson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Tara Bilby
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Wendi Corales
usually #1 Doubles 65%, also #3 Doubles 18% · 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 Burkhalter + Shelley Sisson3347% gamesnot enough data
Tara Bilby + Amy Bergeron3350% gamesnot enough data
Carolyn Kalman + Charlotte Scott4164% gamesnot enough data
Carolyn Kalman + Debra Ethridge134 matchesnot enough data
Debbie Burkhalter + Charlotte Scott224 matchesnot enough data
Debbie Burkhalter + Debra Ethridge303 matchesnot enough data
Wendi Corales + Charlotte Scott213 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
Carolyn Kalman
18W–15L career · 19 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.81
4
Debbie Burkhalter
15W–8L career · 13 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Amy Bergeron
23W–14L career · 15 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.68
4
Charlotte Scott
23W–11L career · 15 lines in 2026
39%61%<1%
3.54
4
Debra Ethridge
9W–12L career · 13 lines in 2026
60%40%<1%
3.46
Erika Rase
8W–11L career · 13 lines in 2026
not enough data
Julie Oubre
7W–6L career · 7 lines in 2026
not enough data
Melissa Verges
12W–12L career · 10 lines in 2026
not enough data
Michaela Franklin
11W–15L career · 15 lines in 2026
not enough data
Shelley Sisson
8W–4L career · 6 lines in 2026
not enough data
Tara Bilby
14W–12L career · 10 lines in 2026
not enough data
Wendi Corales
15W–13L career · 17 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.