Teams

Scorpions

2025 55 & OVER WEEKDAY WOMEN · 7.0 WOMEN

14 players · average NTRP 3.25 / TEXAS

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 →
Schedule1 played
2025-01-27vs The Love BugsWon 21
W#1 DoublesMelissa Cliver / Ann Brownlee vs Maggie Everett / Roshawna Sloan6-4, 7-6
W#2 DoublesSue Baillio / Kathy Gatcomb vs Melinda Condos / Nancy Hill2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesPatty Cuen / Karen Pape vs Kim Lonergan / Ann Ross4-6, 4-6
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 7.0 WOMEN 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 3.08 estimated across 8 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.

3.29
Karen Pape
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.23
Melissa Cliver
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.16
Ann Brownlee
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.13
Linda Walsdorf
published
3.08
Sue Baillio
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
3.05
Patty Cuen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.98
Roxani Alvarez
published
2.72
Ann Wisecarver
published 3
Gloria Mallory
published
Jeanne Wentzell
published
Kathy Gatcomb
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Mary Jo George
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Rainy Evans
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Sharon Balmos
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.

Roxani Alvarez + Patty Cuen9258% games+3.3% vs expected
Ann Brownlee + Karen Pape3647% games−8.1% vs expected
Ann Brownlee + Melissa Cliver2341% games−11.0% vs expected
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.

Karen Pape
11W–14L career · 1 line in 2025
2%91%7%
3.29
Melissa Cliver
15W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
5%92%3%
3.23
3.5
Ann Brownlee
15W–18L career · 1 line in 2025
13%86%1%
3.16
Linda Walsdorf
8W–5L career · no lines in 2025
<1%18%82%
3.13
Sue Baillio
38W–20L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%29%71%
3.08
Patty Cuen
15W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%35%65%
3.05
Roxani Alvarez
14W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%55%45%
2.98
3
Ann Wisecarver
1W–4L career · no lines in 2025
6%92%2%
2.72
Gloria Mallory
3W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Jeanne Wentzell
1W–6L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Kathy Gatcomb
3W–2L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Mary Jo George
14W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Rainy Evans
3W–8L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Sharon Balmos
0W–1L career · no lines in 2025
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.