Teams

MATA/Dana Johnson

2026 MATA USTA Adult 55 & Over - Spring · 3.0 Women Saturday

14 players · average NTRP 2.88 / GEORGIA

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 →
Schedule9 played
2026-04-04vs MATA/Debbie DavisWon 21
L#1 DoublesHilary Ellwood / Hollie Nepveux vs Julie Register / Caron Williams4-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesPeggy Elliott / Tanja Battle vs Heather DeRojas / Stacy Carr6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAnita C Smith / Sharon Livingston vs Kay Sanders / Yvonne Apodaca6-3, 2-6, 1-0
2026-03-28vs MATA/Debbie DavisLost 12
L#1 DoublesPeggy Elliott / Tanja Battle vs Laura Jones / Julie Register7-6, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesWanda Young / Hollie Nepveux vs Debbie Davis / Cindy Perkins5-7, 7-5, 0-1
W#3 DoublesAnne Tunnessen / Anita C Smith vs Myrna Finch / Lynn Farmer6-2, 6-0
2026-03-21vs MATA/Debbie DavisLost 03
L#1 DoublesSharon Livingston / Deborah Denson vs Debbie Davis / Catherine Goff5-7, 7-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesDana Johnson / Anita C Smith vs Dana Leary / Heather DeRojas5-7, 1-6
L#3 DoublesWanda Young / Sonja Martin vs Dawn Miner / Kay Sanders4-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-03-14vs MATA/Debbie DavisWon 21
L#1 DoublesSandra Currie / Anne Tunnessen vs Catherine Goff / Cindy Perkins6-4, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesHollie Nepveux / Mary Walker vs Stacy Carr / Heather DeRojas7-5, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesTanja Battle / Peggy Elliott vs Sara Mason / Lynn Farmer6-2, 6-2
2026-03-07vs MATA/Debbie DavisLost 12
L#1 DoublesMary Walker / Hollie Nepveux vs Catherine Goff / Laura Jones4-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesChristine Samet / Phyllis Lane vs Julie Register / Dana Leary2-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesSandra Currie / Anne Tunnessen vs Caron Williams / Myrna Finch6-3, 6-2
2026-03-06vs MATA/Debbie DavisWon 30
W#1 DoublesMary Walker / Sonja Martin vs Catherine Goff / Laura Jones7-5, 6-2
W#2 DoublesPeggy Elliott / Tanja Battle vs Julie Register / Stacy Carr6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesSharon Livingston / Wanda Young vs Debbie Davis / Heather DeRojas6-1, 6-2
2026-02-28vs MATA/Debbie DavisWon 30
W#1 DoublesPhyllis Lane / Hilary Ellwood vs Heather DeRojas / Laura Jones6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesDana Johnson / Sandra Currie vs Dawn Miner / Yvonne Apodaca6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesSharon Livingston / Hollie Nepveux vs Kay Sanders / Lynn Farmer6-0, 6-2
2026-02-14vs MATA/Debbie DavisWon 21
L#1 DoublesPhyllis Lane / Mary Walker vs Laura Jones / Caron Williams7-6, 1-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesChristine Samet / Sharon Livingston vs Stacy Carr / Dawn Miner6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesAnne Tunnessen / Sonja Martin vs Myrna Finch / Yvonne Apodaca6-1, 6-2
2026-02-07vs MATA/Debbie DavisWon 30
W#1 DoublesMary Walker / Sonja Martin vs Catherine Goff / Laura Jones6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesDana Johnson / Christine Samet vs Heather DeRojas / Lynn Farmer6-3, 5-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesPhyllis Lane / Deborah Denson vs Kay Sanders / Sara Mason6-4, 6-3
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 3.0 Women Saturday 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 2.83 estimated across 14 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.

3.01
Sharon Livingston
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.01
Sonja Martin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.95
Phyllis Lane
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.90
Hilary Ellwood
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.87
Hollie Nepveux
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
2.86
Anne Tunnessen
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.85
Christine Samet
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.82
Sandra Currie
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.79
Peggy Elliott
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.79
Tanja Battle
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.77
Deborah Denson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.77
Wanda Young
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.73
Mary Walker
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
2.47
Anita C Smith
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
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.

Christine Samet + Sharon Livingston16363% games+6.7% vs expected
Phyllis Lane + Deborah Denson8067% games+3.8% vs expected
Phyllis Lane + Sonja Martin6359% games−1.6% vs expected
Wanda Young + Sharon Livingston3358% games−4.3% vs expected
Phyllis Lane + Hilary Ellwood3254% gamesnot enough data
Sonja Martin + Peggy Elliott4161% gamesnot enough data
Anita C Smith + Anne Tunnessen314 matchesnot enough data
Phyllis Lane + Sharon Livingston314 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.

Sharon Livingston
33W–13L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%46%54%
3.01
Sonja Martin
27W–8L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%47%53%
3.01
Phyllis Lane
24W–11L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%64%36%
2.95
Hilary Ellwood
16W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%77%23%
2.90
Hollie Nepveux
13W–16L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%83%17%
2.87
3
Anne Tunnessen
16W–19L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%84%16%
2.86
3
Christine Samet
25W–12L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%85%14%
2.85
Sandra Currie
10W–12L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
2.82
Peggy Elliott
20W–11L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.79
Tanja Battle
20W–22L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.79
3
Deborah Denson
10W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%92%5%
2.77
Wanda Young
7W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.77
Mary Walker
14W–12L career · 7 lines in 2026
5%92%2%
2.73
2.5
Anita C Smith
8W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%58%42%
2.47

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.