Teams

beckyprocter65

2022 Cap Mixed 65 & over · 8.0 Mixed

7 players · average NTRP 3.88 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-08-05vs KDeHavenLost 02
L#1 DoublesRebecca Procter / Michael Rhaney vs Michell Wilson / Steven Wilson2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesElizabeth Samuels / Kenneth Gillespie vs Linda Carroll / Steven Anderson2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2022-07-28vs KDeHavenWon 10
W#1 DoublesRebecca Procter / Kenneth Gillespie vs Steven Wilson / Michell Wilson6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2022-07-07vs KDeHavenLost 01
L#1 DoublesSusan Doninger Greer / Steve Greer vs Fran Ange / Charles Venners1-6, 5-7
2022-06-30vs KDeHavenSplit 11
L#2 DoublesMark Stephenson / Susan Doninger Greer vs Steven Wilson / Michell Wilson3-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesRebecca Procter / Kenneth Gillespie vs Linda Carroll / Joe Kingery6-0, 6-0
2022-06-29vs KDeHavenWon 10
W#1 DoublesRebecca Procter / Michael Rhaney vs Mindy Dehaven / Ken Dehaven7-5, 6-1
2022-06-23vs KDeHavenLost 02
L#2 DoublesSusan Doninger Greer / Steve Greer vs Michell Wilson / Steven Wilson3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesSharon Foster / Kenneth Gillespie vs Mindy Dehaven / Ken Dehaven4-6, 6-4, 0-1
2022-06-09Won 10
W#3 DoublesMark Stephenson / Rebecca Procter vs Steven Anderson / Judy Hobson6-2, 3-6, 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 standings for 8.0 Mixed have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.38 estimated across 4 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.

3.48
Rebecca Procter
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.38
Susan Doninger Greer
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.34
Kenneth Gillespie
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.33
John Winn
published
Linda Winn
published
Michael Rhaney
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.

Rebecca Procter + Kenneth Gillespie4167% gamesnot enough data
Susan Doninger Greer + Michael Rhaney033 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
Rebecca Procter
185W–147L career · 5 lines in 2022
56%44%<1%
3.48
4
Susan Doninger Greer
97W–125L career · 3 lines in 2022
83%17%<1%
3.38
3.5
Kenneth Gillespie
51W–64L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%88%11%
3.34
4
Elizabeth Samuels
0W–3L career · type S · no lines in 2022
90%10%<1%
3.33
John Winn
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Linda Winn
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Michael Rhaney
1W–4L career · no lines in 2022
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.