Teams

Creaky Wheels

2023 Legends League (Spring) · 7.5 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.17 / OAHU

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-03-15vs Shades of GreySplit 11
W#2 DoublesLaurel Shim / Shirley Marks vs Sally Takamine / Diane Hiatt6-4, 6-3
L#3 DoublesChristine Barger / Marie-Christine Hothan vs Riko Kuroki / Kathleen Teruya3-6, 1-6
2023-03-08Won 10
W#3 DoublesTerry Beuret / Marie-Christine Hothan vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2023-03-01vs Shades of GreyWon 10
W#3 DoublesLaurel Shim / Shirley Marks vs Suzanne Bernstein / Patty Schmitz6-0, 6-1
2023-02-15vs Shades of GreyLost 01
L#2 DoublesLaurel Shim / Christine Barger vs Marilyn Nakamura / Elaine Yoshinaga2-6, 0-6
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 standings2 teams · 7.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Creaky Wheels4212615127
2Shades of Grey2461225171

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 3.07 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.

3.27
Laurel Shim
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.06
Marie-Christine Hothan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.87
Nancy Nagamine
published 3
Felice Broglio
published
Martha Welch
published
Melba Swift
published
Minnie Chinn
published
Shirley Marks
published
Stephanie Bates
published
Susan Ashford
published
Terry Beuret
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.

Nancy Nagamine + Marie-Christine Hothan7164% games+12.3% vs expected
Shirley Marks + Martha Welch9855% games−0.4% 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.

3.5
Laurel Shim
20W–26L career · 3 lines in 2023
2%94%4%
3.27
3
Marie-Christine Hothan
42W–17L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%32%68%
3.06
3
Nancy Nagamine
59W–32L career · no lines in 2023
<1%84%16%
2.87
Felice Broglio
7W–6L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Martha Welch
45W–33L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Melba Swift
3W–10L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Minnie Chinn
1W–10L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Shirley Marks
22W–28L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Stephanie Bates
1W–3L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Susan Ashford
32W–23L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Terry Beuret
9W–10L career · no 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.