Teams

MCAC:Hoagland:Hoagland

2022 Cape COMBO 40 & Over 7.5 Women · 7.5 Women Fit 1

12 players · average NTRP 3.90 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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 →
Schedule8 played
2022-02-22vs MCAC:Ally-Cats:HarbilasLost 12
W#1 DoublesJoyce Taber / Denise Wright vs Karin Mazzoni / Lauriene Morin0-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAmanda Howey / Kristina Mousseau vs Jane Craig / Lisa Swansey2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesBaysie Wightman / Marjorie White vs Nancy Whitehurst / Tish Whitney2-6, 4-6
2022-02-15vs MCAC:Ally-Cats:HarbilasLost 12
L#1 DoublesJoyce Taber / Pamela Peek vs Jane Craig / Lisa Swansey4-6, 6-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesKristina Mousseau / Amanda Howey vs Karin Mazzoni / Lauriene Morin1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesJoanne Mahoney / Alicia Hyde vs Christine Taylor / Nancy Whitehurst6-3, 5-4
2022-02-08vs MCAC:Ally-Cats:HarbilasLost 03
L#1 DoublesJoyce Taber / Heather Palmer vs Alison Harbilas / Lauriene Morin5-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesMarjorie White / Amanda Howey vs Jane Craig / Kimberly Gazal Santos2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesClaire Sheehan / Kristina Mousseau vs Christine Taylor / Nancy Whitehurst2-6, 1-6
2022-02-01vs MCAC:Ally-Cats:HarbilasLost 12
W#1 DoublesJoyce Taber / Pamela Peek vs Ro Nelson / Kimberly Gazal Santos6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesDenise Wright / Alicia Hyde vs Alison Harbilas / Lauriene Morin1-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesHeather Palmer / Kristina Mousseau vs Christine Taylor / Lisa Swansey6-2, 5-6, 0-1
2022-01-25vs MCAC:Ally-Cats:HarbilasLost 03
L#1 DoublesPamela Peek / Joyce Taber vs Alison Harbilas / Lauriene Morin5-7, 4-3, 0-1
L#2 DoublesDenise Wright / Alicia Hyde vs Jane Craig / Kimberly Gazal Santos5-7, 4-2, 0-1
L#3 DoublesClaire Sheehan / Kristina Mousseau vs Christine Taylor / Lisa Swansey2-6, 2-6
2022-01-18vs MCAC:Ally-Cats:HarbilasWon 21
L#1 DoublesMerry Abbott / Joyce Taber vs Karin Mazzoni / Lauriene Morin4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesDenise Wright / Marjorie White vs Alison Harbilas / Lisa Nunes3-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesClaire Sheehan / Alicia Hyde vs Amy Rice / Dianne Teceno6-7, 5-4, 1-0
2022-01-04vs MCAC:Ally-Cats:HarbilasSplit 11
L#2 DoublesClaire Sheehan / Marjorie White vs Dianne Teceno / Amy Rice2-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesBaysie Wightman / Robin Perry vs Lisa Swansey / Jane Craig7-6, 1-5, 1-0
2021-12-14vs MCAC:Ally-Cats:HarbilasLost 12
L#1 DoublesJoyce Taber / Baysie Wightman vs Karin Mazzoni / Lauriene Morin1-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesDenise Wright / Amanda Howey vs Lisa Nunes / Amy Rice6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesHeather Palmer / Kristina Mousseau vs Christine Taylor / Nancy Whitehurst7-6, 4-5, 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 standings2 teams · 7.5 Women Fit 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MCAC:Ally-Cats:Harbilas7117719173
2MCAC:Hoagland:Hoagland1771738259

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 3.28 estimated across 7 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.

3.75
Baysie Wightman
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
Denise Wright
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 4
Heather Palmer
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.66
Claire Sheehan
published 4
3.40
Kristina Mousseau
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.29
Alicia Hyde
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.09
Joyce Taber
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.06
Marjorie White
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.70
Netty Hoagland
published
Joanne Mahoney
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Merry Abbott
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Pamela Peek
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.

Alicia Hyde + Kristina Mousseau6459% games+8.0% vs expected
Joyce Taber + Kristina Mousseau351655% games+5.6% vs expected
Joanne Mahoney + Baysie Wightman2537% games−2.4% vs expected
Marjorie White + Denise Wright4253% gamesnot enough data
Pamela Peek + Marjorie White0543% gamesnot enough data
Joyce Taber + Netty Hoagland044 matchesnot enough data
Pamela Peek + Baysie Wightman314 matchesnot enough data
Baysie Wightman + Denise Wright044 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
Baysie Wightman
14W–26L career · 3 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Denise Wright
30W–61L career · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Heather Palmer
16W–20L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Claire Sheehan
15W–18L career · no lines in 2022
11%88%<1%
3.66
Kristina Mousseau
101W–89L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%78%22%
3.40
3.5
Alicia Hyde
47W–23L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%93%5%
3.29
Joyce Taber
144W–136L career · 7 lines in 2022
25%75%<1%
3.09
Marjorie White
125W–152L career · 4 lines in 2022
31%69%<1%
3.06
Netty Hoagland
33W–72L career · no lines in 2022
99%1%<1%
2.70
Joanne Mahoney
23W–30L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Merry Abbott
14W–28L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Pamela Peek
13W–15L career · 3 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.