Teams

WCCP-Graceful Acers

2023 Adult 55 & Over · 7.0 WOMEN

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / EASTERN WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2022-10-22vs GAC-The Dalles Court ClubLost 12
L#1 DoublesPaula Scott / Lisa Marks vs Karen Fossum / E J Howe7-6, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMichelle Burgess / Susan Busch vs Rebecca Roland / Mauntrece Zamzow5-7, 4-6
W#3 DoublesHeidi Rudy / Laurie Stanley vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-10-22vs EW-WCCP-HuntLost 03
L#1 DoublesLisa Marks / Theresa Parks vs Hara Allison / Terri Ruthruff3-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesPaula Scott / Heidi Rudy vs Patti Marvel / Karen Henderson2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesMuriel Blevins / Laurie Stanley vs Cyndie Lempesis / Leslie Edwards2-6, 2-6
2022-10-21vs WRAC-NoydLost 12
W#1 DoublesTheresa Parks / Paula Scott vs J Colleen Berry / Cynthia Noyd6-4, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesLaurie Stanley / Heidi Rudy vs KIMBERLY HABICH / Annette Alt1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesMichelle Burgess / Susan Busch vs Leslie Blair / Jennifer Carlson5-7, 1-6
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 standings8 teams · 7.0 WOMEN
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1EW-WCCP-Hunt3090138
2WCCP-Middle Skittles3063673
3YTC-Kimel21541183
4GAC-The Dalles Court Club21451189
5CBRC-Davis-Vedder12451190
6WRAC-Noyd12361289
7WRAC-Woodward03361392
8WCCP-Graceful Acers03271598

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 2.77 estimated across 3 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.

2.94
Michelle Burgess
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.76
Susan Busch
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.61
Heidi Rudy
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
Laurie Stanley
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Lisa Marks
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Muriel Blevins
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Paula Scott
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Theresa Parks
usually #1 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.

Lisa Marks + Paula Scott9357% games+16.4% vs expected
Michelle Burgess + Susan Busch1741% games−6.4% vs expected
Theresa Parks + Paula Scott1738% games−13.1% vs expected
Michelle Burgess + Heidi Rudy044 matchesnot enough data
Laurie Stanley + Susan Busch134 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
Michelle Burgess
16W–35L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%67%33%
2.94
3
Susan Busch
43W–63L career · 2 lines in 2023
3%92%5%
2.76
3
Heidi Rudy
12W–33L career · 3 lines in 2023
21%79%<1%
2.61
Laurie Stanley
4W–13L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Lisa Marks
25W–20L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Muriel Blevins
9W–9L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Paula Scott
17W–14L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Theresa Parks
10W–13L career · 2 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.