Teams

7-JPermutt-CHTC

2024 Eno River Combo 55 & Over · 55 & Over Combo 6.5 Women Day

11 players · average NTRP 3.10 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2024-10-03vs 3-BGeorgi-HRWon 10
W#1 DoublesJoelle Permutt / Maribeth Hamilton vs Kim Craig / Judy Croan6-1, 7-6
2024-09-26vs 6-MJenkins-CHCCLost 01
L#3 DoublesMaribeth Hamilton / Carol Davis vs Cynthia Cross / Jane Holroyd0-6, 0-6
2024-09-12vs 5-MLong-ENOLost 01
L#3 DoublesAmy Strong / Maribeth Hamilton vs Beth Clark / Stacy Brehm4-6, 0-6
2024-09-05vs 3-BGeorgi-HRLost 01
L#2 DoublesMonica Kolzet / Maribeth Hamilton vs West Dupuis / Rebecca Georgi3-6, 3-6
2024-08-29vs 4-LFarber-CHTCLost 01
L#2 DoublesGail Calloway / Katherine Zeph vs Araya Coffey / Jane Thrailkill0-6, 0-6
2024-08-22vs 1-DWebb-ENOLost 02
L#1 DoublesKatharine Walton / Maribeth Hamilton vs Brenda Pratt / Karen Foster2-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesAnahid Vrana / Katherine Zeph vs Denise Heinze / Janice Clayton1-6, 0-6
2024-08-21vs 6-MJenkins-CHCCLost 01
L#1 DoublesMaribeth Hamilton / Amy Tiemann vs Christy Bowman / Monica Jenkins6-3, 2-6, 1-0
2024-08-15vs 2-JHagerty-YMCALost 01
L#1 DoublesMaribeth Hamilton / Amy Tiemann vs Claire Blackwelder / Donna Newell2-6, 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 standings for 55 & Over Combo 6.5 Women Day have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 2.93 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.

3.48
Amy Strong
published 3.5
3.25
Joelle Permutt
published
Anahid Vrana
published 3.5
3.13
2.81
Maribeth Hamilton
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.68
Denise Stabenau
published 3
2.21
Katherine Zeph
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
Amy Tiemann
published
Gail Calloway
published
Katharine Walton
published
Monica Kolzet
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.

Amy Strong + Joelle Permutt213 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
Amy Strong
39W–22L career · no lines in 2024
<1%56%44%
3.48
Joelle Permutt
33W–17L career · no lines in 2024
2%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Anahid Vrana
1W–3L career · type S · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Michele Freiburghouse
2W–7L career · no lines in 2024
17%83%<1%
3.13
3
Maribeth Hamilton
43W–56L career · 7 lines in 2024
1%92%7%
2.81
3
Denise Stabenau
2W–4L career · no lines in 2024
8%91%1%
2.68
2.5
Katherine Zeph
17W–44L career · 2 lines in 2024
0%99%1%
2.21
Amy Tiemann
6W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Gail Calloway
6W–7L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Katharine Walton
1W–7L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Monica Kolzet
3W–3L career · no lines in 2024
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.