Teams

LCTA55/Cechak/LTPDI

LCTA 54 & Over Fall League · 54 & over - Women 3.5 Friday

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SOUTH CAROLINA

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 →

Flight standings for 54 & over - Women 3.5 Friday 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 3.31 estimated across 10 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.

3.61
Kathleen Heffling
published
3.44
Deborah McFann
published 3.5
3.40
Holly Bates
published 3.5
3.32
Elisabeth Parkinson
published 3.5
3.30
Diane Deblasi
published 3.5
3.28
Elaine Cechak
published 3.5
3.25
Nancy McGinley
published
Amy Etheridge
published 3.5
Diana Lippman
published 3.5
3.24
Penny Hoey
published
3.21
Jill Leahy
published
3.08
Faye Bull
published 3.5
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.

Holly Bates + Deborah McFann561462% games+2.4% vs expected
Faye Bull + Diana Lippman4261% games+0.3% vs expected
Nancy McGinley + Elaine Cechak20857% games−1.7% vs expected
Faye Bull + Nancy McGinley6549% games−4.9% vs expected
Elisabeth Parkinson + Penny Hoey224 matchesnot enough data
Faye Bull + Elaine Cechak123 matchesnot enough data
Diana Lippman + Nancy McGinley123 matchesnot enough data
Diana Lippman + Elaine Cechak123 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.

Kathleen Heffling
48W–14L career · no lines in 2026
<1%20%80%
3.61
3.5
Deborah McFann
101W–37L career · no lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
3.44
3.5
Holly Bates
90W–25L career · no lines in 2026
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Elisabeth Parkinson
40W–67L career · no lines in 2026
1%91%8%
3.32
3.5
Diane Deblasi
33W–29L career · no lines in 2026
1%93%6%
3.30
3.5
Elaine Cechak
51W–34L career · no lines in 2026
2%94%5%
3.28
Nancy McGinley
50W–42L career · no lines in 2026
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Amy Etheridge
23W–37L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Diana Lippman
33W–23L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Penny Hoey
55W–68L career · no lines in 2026
3%94%2%
3.24
Jill Leahy
27W–31L career · no lines in 2026
5%93%1%
3.21
3.5
Faye Bull
40W–47L career · no lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
3.08

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.