Teams

MO/Doan/40&Over4.0W

2022 Springfield Adult 40 & Over League · 4.0 Adult Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.80 / MISSOURI

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 →
Schedule6 played
2022-07-09vs Laurie's TeamWon 40
W#1 DoublesKelly Kramer / Lucy Stein vs April Edwards / Karen Thies6-4, 6-1
W#1 SinglesHee-Sun Kim vs Clarissa Steele7-6, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesHuong Doan / Margaret Taylor vs Laurie Everett / Peggy Kaden6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCarol Mailes / Debbie Pell vs Kathy Hodges / Beverly Horvit6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2022-07-09vs Laurie's TeamWon 31
W#1 DoublesJulie Skinner / Lucy Stein vs Linnea Adelson / Karen Thies6-3, 6-0
L#1 SinglesPatricia Musick vs Amy Blake6-7, 2-6
W#2 DoublesCarol Mailes / Nancy Winters vs Rhoda Ponzer / Nancy Whitmar7-6, 6-1
W#3 DoublesHee-Sun Kim / Margaret Taylor vs Kathy Hodges / Beverly Horvit6-1, 6-2
2022-06-25vs Laurie's TeamSplit 22
W#1 DoublesLucy Stein / Julie Skinner vs Karen Thies / April Edwards7-5, 6-1
L#1 SinglesHee-Sun Kim vs Clarissa Steele3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMargaret Taylor / Huong Doan vs Peggy Kaden / Rhoda Ponzer6-1, 6-3
L#3 DoublesDebbie Pell / Carol Mailes vs Amy Blake / Laurie Everett4-6, 4-6
2022-05-26vs Marsha's TeamSplit 22
W#1 DoublesKelly Kramer / Patricia Musick vs Cheryl Ballou / Allison Steiner6-2, 6-1
W#1 SinglesHee-Sun Kim vs Carolee Jones3-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#2 DoublesLucy Stein / Julie Skinner vs Cynthia Thibault / Carmen Broadbent3-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMargaret Taylor / Nancy Winters vs Mona Palmer / Caroline Bond2-6, 3-6
2022-05-12vs Marsha's TeamSplit 22
W#1 DoublesKelly Kramer / Patricia Musick vs Cheryl Ballou / Marsha Marsh6-3, 6-1
L#1 SinglesChristina Waugh vs Mona Palmer0-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesCarol Mailes / Nancy Winters vs Carolee Jones / Jo Sherbo2-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesHuong Doan / Leslie Bray vs Leslie Echols / Carmen Broadbent4-6, 2-6
2022-04-28vs Marsha's TeamWon 31
W#1 DoublesJulie Skinner / Lucy Stein vs Cheryl Ballou / Mona Palmer2-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#1 SinglesHee-Sun Kim vs Marsha Marsh6-2, 6-0
W#2 DoublesKelly Kramer / Patricia Musick vs Leslie Echols / Cynthia Thibault6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLeslie Bray / Debbie Pell vs Carolee Jones / Jo Sherbo2-6, 3-6
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 standings3 teams · 4.0 Adult Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MO/Doan/40&Over4.0W5116823196
2Marsha's Team33111327202
3Laurie's Team1591532246

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.49 estimated across 6 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.

Carol Mailes
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
Christina Waugh
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.75
Hee-Sun Kim
usually #1 Singles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.64
Margaret Taylor
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.46
Kelly Kramer
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.41
Huong Doan
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.35
Julie Skinner
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.33
Debbie Pell
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Leslie Bray
published
Lucy Stein
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Nancy Winters
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Patricia Musick
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · 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.

Patricia Musick + Kelly Kramer7068% games+11.1% vs expected
Hee-Sun Kim + Margaret Taylor13656% games+1.2% vs expected
Huong Doan + Debbie Pell171450% games−0.6% vs expected
Carol Mailes + Julie Skinner6453% games−4.7% vs expected
Margaret Taylor + Debbie Pell2351% gamesnot enough data
Patricia Musick + Julie Skinner314 matchesnot enough data
Margaret Taylor + Huong Doan314 matchesnot enough data
Julie Skinner + Lucy Stein314 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.

4
Carol Mailes
55W–24L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Christina Waugh
0W–16L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
4
Hee-Sun Kim
85W–75L career · 5 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.75
Margaret Taylor
30W–31L career · 4 lines in 2022
14%86%<1%
3.64
Kelly Kramer
49W–29L career · 4 lines in 2022
61%39%<1%
3.46
3.5
Huong Doan
46W–54L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%76%23%
3.41
Julie Skinner
28W–38L career · 4 lines in 2022
87%13%<1%
3.35
3.5
Debbie Pell
112W–89L career · 6 lines in 2022
1%90%9%
3.33
Leslie Bray
9W–19L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Lucy Stein
47W–23L career · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
Nancy Winters
13W–21L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Patricia Musick
67W–15L career · 4 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.