Teams

LJAM-Ames/Westport 55s 6.5

2023 Lake Combo Doubles 55 & Over · Women 6.5

9 players · average NTRP 3.21 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2023-09-28vs LCLO-LONG/Peninsula 55sLost 03
L#1 DoublesMary Shelton / Kathleen Stiffler vs Mindy Francis / Valerie Smithers6-3, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesBeth McClay / Zahra Simonetti vs Melinda Little / Maureen Leach0-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesJoanne Empey Rodriguez / Barbara Minor vs Gayle Larson / Sherry Hunstad1-6, 1-6
2023-09-21vs LDTA-Takes-McCue-Karnatz/EdgemoorLost 01
L#3 DoublesZahra Simonetti / Beth McClay vs Katherine Karnatz / Kathleen Kaake5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2023-09-14vs LHNY-Nyquist/Jetton 6.5 ComboLost 01
L#2 DoublesSandra Stinson / Joanne Empey Rodriguez vs Norma Zitnik / Beth Schleck0-6, 1-6
2023-08-31vs LRDA-Davis6.5/RRCCLost 02
L#1 DoublesKathleen Stiffler / Sandra Stinson vs Julli Goodwin / Natalie Van Epps6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesShirley Pirkl / Joanne Empey Rodriguez vs Ruthie Naylor / Robbie Davis6-3, 2-6, 1-0
2023-08-24vs LMMI-Michael/River RunWon 10
W#2 DoublesZahra Simonetti / Meagan Palmer vs Mary Anne Michael / Carol Hamel6-1, 7-6
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 Women 6.5 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 2.87 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.

3.38
Ann Murphy
published 3.5
3.00
Barbara Bischoff
published 3.5
3.00
Kathleen Stiffler
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.81
Shirley Pirkl
published
Barbara Minor
published 3
2.71
Beth McClay
published 3
2.70
Zahra Simonetti
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.51
Joanne Empey Rodriguez
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Sandra Stinson
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.

Ann Murphy + Kathleen Stiffler123 matchesnot enough data
Zahra Simonetti + Kathleen Stiffler213 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.

3.5
Ann Murphy
13W–8L career · no lines in 2023
<1%81%19%
3.38
3.5
Barbara Bischoff
0W–6L career · type S · no lines in 2023
49%51%<1%
3.00
3.5
Kathleen Stiffler
152W–161L career · 2 lines in 2023
51%49%<1%
3.00
Shirley Pirkl
3W–6L career · no lines in 2023
1%91%8%
2.81
3
Barbara Minor
0W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
3
Beth McClay
2W–10L career · no lines in 2023
5%94%1%
2.71
3
Zahra Simonetti
140W–173L career · 3 lines in 2023
6%93%1%
2.70
3
Joanne Empey Rodriguez
31W–61L career · 3 lines in 2023
46%54%<1%
2.51
Sandra Stinson
0W–2L career · no lines in 2023
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.