Teams

Nixon

2022 IA 55 & Over Adult League · 8.0 W 55 Over

10 players · average NTRP 3.75 / IOWA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2021-12-05vs IA/Adams&Kron/55&Over8.0WLost 12
L#1 DoublesKim Gillum / Meg Nixon vs Catherine Linn / Nancy Mappin2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesRebecca Studer / Luann Gilman vs Sandra Kaloupek / Carole Kron7-5, 1-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesPamela Christoffers / Jennifer Clemen vs Linda Carney / Susan Stump6-3, 7-5
2021-11-05vs Krause/BruntzSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMeg Nixon / Rebecca Studer vs Lynette Brown / Beth Eganhouse1-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesKim Gillum / Danita Olafson vs Kim Stewart / Sandy Wegner7-6, 7-5
2021-10-17vs RovnerLost 12
L#1 DoublesBecky Flander / Rebecca Studer vs Lori Marchese / Dawn Ver Steeg4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesJulie Kinsella / Jennifer Clemen vs Karen Mann / Joy Johnson3-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesMeg Nixon / Kim Gillum vs Liz Mallaney / Carla Ulan6-3, 4-6, 1-0
2021-10-10vs IA/Adams&Kron/55&Over8.0WLost 12
W#1 DoublesBecky Flander / Rebecca Studer vs Linda Carney / Carole Kron6-3, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJulie Swank / Julie Kinsella vs Deb Adams / Liz McPearce3-1
L#3 DoublesDanita Olafson / Kim Gillum vs Sue Goodmundson / Emily Shultz5-7, 7-6, 0-1
2021-10-10vs CramWon 30
W#1 DoublesBecky Flander / Rebecca Studer vs Cynthia McCann / Karen Koch6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesDanita Olafson / Kim Gillum vs Catherine Brown / Ellen Cram6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJulie Kinsella / Jennifer Clemen vs Marcia Carman / Kim Sherman6-2, 6-4
2021-09-26vs CramWon 30
W#1 DoublesBecky Flander / Rebecca Studer vs Ellen Welborn / Julie Gatens6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesPamela Christoffers / Jennifer Clemen vs Cyndie Birchansky / Marcia Carman6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesKim Gillum / Danita Olafson vs Cynthia McCann / Ria Meyer6-1, 6-2
2021-09-19vs RovnerLost 03
L#1 DoublesBecky Flander / Rebecca Studer vs Dawn Ver Steeg / Leslie Shipp6-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesPamela Christoffers / Sandra Hovey vs Lori Marchese / Liz Mallaney1-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesKim Gillum / Danita Olafson vs Karen Mann / Joy Johnson4-6, 4-6
2021-09-10vs Krause/BruntzWon 21
W#1 DoublesBecky Flander / Rebecca Studer vs Beth Eganhouse / Lynette Brown6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesPamela Christoffers / Julie Kinsella vs Kim Stewart / Jane Hein3-6, 6-1, 0-1
W#3 DoublesLuann Gilman / Julie Swank vs Kathleen Weyers / Rhonda McCoy6-3, 2-6, 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 standings5 teams · 8.0 W 55 Over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1IA/Adams&Kron/55&Over8.0W62141024210
2Rovner5316819204
3Krause/Bruntz53141025211
4Nixon35121227223
5Cram1742043281

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 3.49 estimated across 7 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.

3.72
Pamela Christoffers
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.71
Rebecca Studer
usually #1 Doubles 91%, also #2 Doubles 9% · published
3.63
Sandra Hovey
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.62
Becky Flander
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.46
Jennifer Clemen
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.25
Meg Nixon
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.00
Danita Olafson
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
Julie Kinsella
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Kim Gillum
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Luann Gilman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · 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.

Kim Gillum + Danita Olafson6751% games+4.4% vs expected
Pamela Christoffers + Rebecca Studer8456% games+0.6% vs expected
Becky Flander + Rebecca Studer231554% games−1.1% vs expected
Sandra Hovey + Pamela Christoffers3254% gamesnot enough data
Jennifer Clemen + Pamela Christoffers224 matchesnot enough data
Jennifer Clemen + Meg Nixon033 matchesnot enough data
Kim Gillum + Meg Nixon123 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.

Pamela Christoffers
28W–27L career · 4 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.72
Rebecca Studer
78W–59L career · 11 lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.71
Sandra Hovey
10W–18L career · 1 line in 2022
16%84%<1%
3.63
4
Becky Flander
103W–81L career · 6 lines in 2022
18%82%<1%
3.62
Jennifer Clemen
13W–27L career · 4 lines in 2022
61%39%<1%
3.46
Meg Nixon
3W–27L career · 3 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Danita Olafson
34W–49L career · 8 lines in 2022
50%50%<1%
3.00
Julie Kinsella
39W–26L career · 8 lines in 2022
not enough data
Kim Gillum
35W–35L career · 7 lines in 2022
not enough data
Luann Gilman
6W–7L career · 2 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.