Teams

OK/Smith/Tulsa

2026 Adult 70 & Over Multi-State Championship · 3.0 Women

5 players · average NTRP 3.00 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-04-30vs MS/Childress/GreenvilleLost 12
W#1 DoublesConnie Mill / Cathy Luckenbach vs Linda Haddock / Judy Ross7-5, 6-0
L#2 DoublesSandra Hurlbutt / Michele Smith vs Jill Pulliam / Katherine Steele6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesDeborah Lee / Vibsen Lay vs Debbie Boykin / Ann McGee1-6, 4-6
2026-04-30vs AR/Dill/NLRWon 21
W#1 DoublesDeborah Lee / Cathy Luckenbach vs Susan Coleman / Sheila Sharp6-2, 7-6
L#2 DoublesMichele Smith / Sandra Hurlbutt vs Joyce Stroud / Linda Rauls1-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesConnie Mill / Vibsen Lay vs Janie Calvert / Barbara Thomason4-6, 6-4, 1-0
2026-04-29vs AR/Wallman/Bella VistaLost 12
L#1 DoublesSandra Hurlbutt / Cathy Luckenbach vs Billie Joslin / Phyllis McCulley3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesConnie Mill / Deborah Lee vs Julie Bothwell / Sheila Lienhart6-2, 1-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMichele Smith / Vibsen Lay vs Norma Hamm / Janice Bowen2-6, 3-6
2026-04-29vs LA/Agin' Cajuns/BroglioLost 12
L#1 DoublesDeborah Lee / Cathy Luckenbach vs Vivian Brown / Regina Viator4-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMichele Smith / Sandra Hurlbutt vs Sandra Huguet / Jan Meaders6-2, 1-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesConnie Mill / Vibsen Lay vs Peggy Grooms / Pearl Garcia1-6, 6-1, 0-1
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 standings10 teams · 3.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1AR/Wallman/Bella Vista40102465
2AR/Wood/LR409311116
3TX/Texas Blossoms/Vernor31102681
4AR/Dill/NLR225715114
5LA/Agin' Cajuns/Broglio226616121
6OK/Smith/Tulsa135717117
7LA/Cochran134818121
8AR/Finton/HSV134818123
9MS/Childress/Greenville134818123
10OK/Culver/Tulsa133921139

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 2.58 estimated across 4 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.

2.88
Cathy Luckenbach
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
Deborah Lee
published 3
2.64
Connie Mill
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.44
Sandra Hurlbutt
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.36
Vibsen Lay
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Sandra Hurlbutt + Cathy Luckenbach101844% games−10.4% vs expected
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
Cathy Luckenbach
30W–36L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
2.88
3
Deborah Lee
21W–28L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
3
Connie Mill
9W–11L career · type S · 4 lines in 2026
17%83%<1%
2.64
Sandra Hurlbutt
24W–41L career · 4 lines in 2026
67%33%<1%
2.44
Vibsen Lay
15W–18L career · 4 lines in 2026
84%16%<1%
2.36

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.