Teams

DEAN 18s 3.5

2022 Piedmont USTA 18 & Over · WOMEN 3.5 18 & Over

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH 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 →
Schedule9 played
2022-05-16vs Cathers 18s 3.5Won 10
W#1 DoublesKaryn Efird / Nancy Solomon vs Sandy Cathers / Melody Davis6-1, 6-1
2022-05-09vs Goy/Georgevich 18s 3.5Lost 01
L#1 DoublesKaryn Efird / Mary Dean vs Kristin Williamson / Kimberly Lancaster3-6, 4-6
2022-05-02Won 10
W#1 DoublesKaryn Efird / Nancy Solomon vs Deborah Ross / Beverly McKinney6-0, 6-2
2022-04-25vs Pretzsch 18s 3.5Won 10
W#1 DoublesKaryn Efird / Nancy Solomon vs Anne Cashion / Beth Ballard6-0, 6-1
2022-04-18vs Pollina 18s 3.5Won 10
W#1 DoublesMary Dean / Karyn Efird vs Lori Harrington / Lynette Paley5-7, 7-6, 1-0
2022-04-04Won 10
W#1 DoublesMary Dean / Karyn Efird vs Cheryl Scott / Allison Steinmetz7-6, 6-4
2022-03-21vs Jones/Clark 18s 3.5Won 10
W#1 DoublesKaryn Efird / Nancy Solomon vs Ashley Xu / Lili Harding6-0, 6-0
2022-03-16vs Yates 18s 3.5Won 10
W#1 DoublesMary Dean / Karyn Efird vs Jennifer Yates / Stephanie Gilmer6-1, 6-2
2022-03-14vs ESSON 18s 3.5Lost 01
L#2 DoublesJenifer Stratton / Karyn Efird vs Donna Esson / Angela Payseur3-6, 5-7
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 3.5 18 & Over 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 3.29 estimated across 11 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.

3.58
Karyn Efird
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published
3.49
Jacqueline Herron
published 3.5
3.40
Patty Craig
published
3.37
Jenny Kemp
published
3.37
Karen Lubeck Smith
published
3.33
Kara Jacobs
published
3.29
Sheri Cram
published
3.17
Jody Wood
published
3.14
Mary Dean
published
3.02
Danielle Laliberte
published 3.5
3.01
Sarah Vess
published
Wimberly Jessup
published
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.

Karyn Efird
256W–113L career · 14 lines in 2022
<1%27%73%
3.58
3.5
Jacqueline Herron
36W–29L career · no lines in 2022
<1%54%46%
3.49
Patty Craig
33W–22L career · no lines in 2022
<1%77%23%
3.40
Jenny Kemp
9W–14L career · no lines in 2022
<1%83%17%
3.37
Karen Lubeck Smith
14W–14L career · no lines in 2022
<1%84%16%
3.37
Kara Jacobs
5W–3L career · no lines in 2022
1%90%9%
3.33
Sheri Cram
7W–2L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.29
Jody Wood
23W–26L career · no lines in 2022
10%89%1%
3.17
Mary Dean
13W–5L career · no lines in 2022
14%86%<1%
3.14
3.5
Danielle Laliberte
1W–8L career · no lines in 2022
44%56%<1%
3.02
Sarah Vess
2W–8L career · no lines in 2022
47%53%<1%
3.01
Wimberly Jessup
2W–0L 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.