Teams

GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/Shepherd/FB

SouthernNewMexico · 2026 USA ADULT 40 & OVER LEAGUE

10 players · average NTRP 2.88 / GEPTA

View scouting list →
Schedule
Flight standings10 teams · 2026 USA ADULT 40 & OVER LEAGUE
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1GEPTA/Alarcon/Adult40&over/3.0W81251126249
2GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/Alvarado/EPTC#272231331268
3GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/DaCosta/EPTC#372221433298
4GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/Wilcox/TW#263211534313
5GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/Castaneda/EPCC#154211535290
6GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/Jabor/EPCC#236162045328
7GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/Shepherd/FB36132347338
8GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/Arreola/EPTC#136132350332
9GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/Cardenas/CCC27152146338
10GEPTA/40&over/3.0W/Boss/EPTC#418102655375

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 2.52 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.

2.71
Claudia Dominguez
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published 3
2.68
Alison Krattiger
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 42% · published 3
2.67
Gemma Ridland
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.02
Corinne Shepherd
usually #3 Doubles 41%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
Mabel Evans
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 46% · published
Magdlyn St-Cyr
usually #3 Doubles 46%, also #2 Doubles 31% · published
Merlinda Hanley
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #1 Singles 36% · published
Sharon Ransom
usually #2 Doubles 65%, also #1 Doubles 19% · published
Sylvia Anaya
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #2 Doubles 36% · published
Tanja Sobing
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 24% · 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.

Tanja Sobing + Claudia Dominguez5749% gamesnot enough data
Corinne Shepherd + Mabel Evans01111% gamesnot enough data
Claudia Dominguez + Alison Krattiger3446% gamesnot enough data
Alison Krattiger + Gemma Ridland3447% gamesnot enough data
Sharon Ransom + Sylvia Anaya2444% gamesnot enough data
Corinne Shepherd + Sharon Ransom1440% gamesnot enough data
Magdlyn St-Cyr + Corinne Shepherd134 matchesnot enough data
Magdlyn St-Cyr + Sylvia Anaya224 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
Claudia Dominguez
60W–65L career · 30 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
2.71
3
Alison Krattiger
29W–54L career · 24 lines in 2026
9%91%1%
2.68
3
Gemma Ridland
14W–13L career · 14 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
2.67
2.5
Corinne Shepherd
2W–38L career · 30 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.02
Mabel Evans
2W–40L career · 22 lines in 2026
not enough data
Magdlyn St-Cyr
13W–36L career · 13 lines in 2026
not enough data
Merlinda Hanley
11W–3L career · 13 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sharon Ransom
66W–105L career · 31 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sylvia Anaya
12W–12L career · 11 lines in 2026
not enough data
Tanja Sobing
27W–37L career · 25 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.