Teams

GOG KREPS

2022 USTA ADULT 40 & OVER - SOCO · WOMEN 3.0 - 40 & OVER - SOCO

12 players · average NTRP 2.90 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule3 played
2022-06-27vs CCOC SUNGWon 10
W#1 DoublesSandy Negaard / Debra VanDeVeer vs Johane Aertker / Barbara Jean Knorr4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2022-06-13vs CSRC RAMSEYLost 01
L#1 DoublesDebra VanDeVeer / Sarah Shaeffer vs Cheri Ramsey / Jennifer Charlier Cox6-4, 1-6, 0-1
2022-06-06vs CCOC SUNGWon 10
W#1 DoublesDebra VanDeVeer / Roseann Engelage vs Irene Larimer / Barbara Jean Knorr2-6, 6-3, 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 WOMEN 3.0 - 40 & OVER - SOCO 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 2.64 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.

2.78
Debra VanDeVeer
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.72
Cara Thoman
published 3
2.71
Christy Walsh
published 3
2.56
Joan Jahelka
published
2.41
Teresa Kreps
published
Bev Bodman
published 2.5
Pamela Maier
published
Roseann Engelage
published
Sandy Negaard
published
Sarah Shaeffer
published
Yvonne Conrad
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.

Cara Thoman + Christy Walsh4352% games+1.0% vs expected
Joan Jahelka + Christy Walsh6549% games−0.4% vs expected
Roseann Engelage + Teresa Kreps4249% games−3.5% vs expected
Bev Bodman + Joan Jahelka2442% games−10.1% vs expected
Yvonne Conrad + Joan Jahelka0527% games−15.1% vs expected
Teresa Kreps + Cara Thoman2345% gamesnot enough data
Roseann Engelage + Cara Thoman224 matchesnot enough data
Roseann Engelage + CHRISTINE RANDONO314 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
Debra VanDeVeer
49W–68L career · 3 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.78
3
CHRISTINE RANDONO
10W–38L career · type A · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Cara Thoman
20W–24L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.72
3
Christy Walsh
21W–27L career · type A · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
2.71
Joan Jahelka
14W–22L career · no lines in 2022
32%68%<1%
2.56
Teresa Kreps
17W–27L career · no lines in 2022
76%24%<1%
2.41
2.5
Bev Bodman
5W–15L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Pamela Maier
1W–5L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Roseann Engelage
11W–16L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Sandy Negaard
15W–10L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Sarah Shaeffer
1W–8L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Yvonne Conrad
2W–28L 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.