Teams

MFigard (Matthews)

2025 Adult 65 & Over League · 65 & Over Adult 3.5 Women - Mon AM

14 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-04-14vs APhillips/CTerry (WSRC)Won 30
W#1 DoublesSally Lowrance / Ann Richards vs Anita Dowker / Holly Pasut5-7, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesRosa Szalanski / Elaine Myers vs Delane Lovelace / Leigh Ingram6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKaren Watford / Dorothy Gandar vs Beverly Russo / Alix Pavlic Phillips6-1, 6-2
2025-04-07vs SStover (Southampton)Won 21
W#1 DoublesLu Ann Burke / Sharon Wooten vs Patrice Forbes / W Kay Bridges6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesPatti Ratcliffe / Anne Sykes vs Denise Bost / Janice Daniel7-5, 2-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesElaine Myers / Teresa Rhyne vs Valerie Link / Sarah Terrio6-0, 6-2
2025-04-02vs JMu (Park Road)Won 30
W#1 DoublesDorothy Gandar / Teresa Rhyne vs Hilda Austin / Joyce Mu6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesLu Ann Burke / Rosa Szalanski vs Karen Duganier / Gayle Gold6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAnn Richards / Margaret MacKie vs Martha Nazemi / Linda Burks-Adams6-1, 6-2
2025-03-29vs SDickson (WSRC)Won 30
W#1 DoublesPatti Ratcliffe / Margaret MacKie vs Karen Bowman / Lynn Davis6-3, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAnne Sykes / Lu Ann Burke vs Marla Horvath / Shay Hartley6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesSuzanne Roxburgh / Sally Lowrance vs Sally Dickson / Anne Mauldin6-3, 6-1
2025-03-17vs JHadley/JNomina (OPRC)Won 21
L#1 DoublesLu Ann Burke / Sharon Wooten vs Susan Castle / Susan McGarry3-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesTeresa Rhyne / Karen Watford vs Kimberly Godwin / Janice Abluton6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesMarla Figard / Ann Richards vs Amy Esterhay / Edie Butler Rowe7-6, 6-2
2025-03-10vs SMyers (Park Road)Won 30
W#1 DoublesAnne Sykes / Patti Ratcliffe vs Diane Smith / Jennifer Stacks6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesMarla Figard / Ann Richards vs Susan Grills / Joeline Ohlhaut6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesKaren Watford / Beverly Moore vs Sandy Myers / Kathleen Goessel6-2, 6-0
2025-03-03vs JSlep (Charlotte Tennis NC)Won 30
W#1 DoublesLu Ann Burke / Sharon Wooten vs James More / Karen Trigg6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesElaine Myers / Rosa Szalanski vs Patty Kahle / Jane Bond6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesTeresa Rhyne / Suzanne Roxburgh vs Wilma Pinter / Dianne Petrosino6-1, 7-5
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 standings6 teams · 65 & Over Adult 3.5 Women - Mon AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MFigard (Matthews)701926111
2SStover (Southampton)5214715134
3JHadley/JNomina (OPRC)4314716156
4JSlep (Charlotte Tennis NC)4391226188
5APhillips/CTerry (WSRC)2591226203
6JMu (Park Road)2571428193

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 3.34 estimated across 12 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.

3.48
Sharon Wooten
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.47
Margaret MacKie
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.40
Karen Watford
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.37
Teresa Rhyne
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.35
Anne Sykes
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.35
Ann Richards
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.34
Suzanne Roxburgh
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.31
Patti Ratcliffe
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.28
Elaine Myers
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.27
Sally Lowrance
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.24
Lu Ann Burke
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.21
Rosa Szalanski
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Dorothy Gandar
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Marla Figard
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Lu Ann Burke + Sharon Wooten5364% games+9.3% vs expected
Margaret MacKie + Sharon Wooten6166% games+2.1% vs expected
Suzanne Roxburgh + Sally Lowrance5165% games+1.6% vs expected
Margaret MacKie + Teresa Rhyne3349% games−4.2% vs expected
Teresa Rhyne + Sharon Wooten213 matchesnot enough data
Anne Sykes + Patti Ratcliffe213 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
Sharon Wooten
102W–80L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%56%44%
3.48
3.5
Margaret MacKie
127W–90L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%58%42%
3.47
Karen Watford
29W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%78%21%
3.40
3.5
Teresa Rhyne
64W–41L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%83%16%
3.37
3.5
Anne Sykes
13W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%87%12%
3.35
3.5
Ann Richards
7W–3L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%88%12%
3.35
Suzanne Roxburgh
13W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%89%10%
3.34
3.5
Patti Ratcliffe
57W–24L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Elaine Myers
6W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%94%5%
3.28
Sally Lowrance
8W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.27
Lu Ann Burke
14W–6L career · 5 lines in 2025
3%95%2%
3.24
Rosa Szalanski
4W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.21
Dorothy Gandar
3W–0L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Marla Figard
3W–1L career · 2 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.