Teams

PD55/Dukes/PTC

2026 USTA Adult 55 & Over - PD · 3.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.33 / SOUTH CAROLINA

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
2026-04-19vs PD (W) 3.5W 55 & Over (Siegal)Won 21
W#1 DoublesGwen McElveen / Marie Player vs Robin Siegal / Marlene Ward3-6, 5-2
W#2 DoublesLynn Dukes / Paige Weiland vs Ronelle van Heerden / Ophillia Dominique6-4, 6-3
L#3 DoublesDenise Weeks / Noreen Compton vs Angela Lorenz / Kristen Perkins4-6, 0-6
2026-04-13vs PD55/Poole/FTCWon 30
W#1 DoublesMarie Player / Beth Reames vs Rita Wilhelm / Margaret Ann Mansell6-0, 6-1
W#2 DoublesLynn Dukes / Paige Weiland vs Jennifer Edwards / Lyrae Rogers6-4, 1-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMary Lisa McGill / Denise Weeks vs Julieanne Yarnal / Meg Brunson6-1, 6-2
2026-04-03vs PD 3.5W 55 & Over (Graham)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesBeth Reames / Marie Player vs Raquel Lastimoso / Kay Zobrist3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesLynn Dukes / Denise Weeks vs Jody Murphy / Elena Claus3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesGwen McElveen / Paige Weiland vs Lyndy Graham / Carla Talley3-6, 6-7
2026-03-23vs PD55/Grant-Cassidy/BYPLost 12
L#1 DoublesLynn Dukes / Paige Weiland vs Shelly Brand / Gee Whetsel2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesNoreen Compton / Gwen McElveen vs Merryn Weaver / Shannon Grant1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesDenise Weeks / Beth Reames vs Jeannie Gainey / Kellie Braddock7-5, 7-6
2026-03-01vs PD55/Poole/FTCLost 12
W#1 DoublesGwen McElveen / Beth Reames vs Crystal Rogers / Trina Stephens6-4, 6-3
L#2 DoublesPaige Weiland / Christine Sari vs Jayne Boswell / Lyrae Rogers2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMary Lisa McGill / Denise Weeks vs Margaret Ann Mansell / Nancy Moore6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2026-02-22vs PD (W) 3.5W 55 & Over (Siegal)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesBeth Reames / Lillian Holladay vs Ophillia Dominique / Pat Pitiranggon4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesGwen McElveen / Paige Weiland vs Ronelle van Heerden / Kathleen Stedman6-1, 6-7, 0-1
W#3 DoublesMary Lisa McGill / Denise Weeks vs Evelyn Goforth / Marlene Ward7-6, 6-1
2026-02-12vs PD 3.5W 55 & Over (Graham)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesDenise Weeks / Beth Reames vs Betsy Graham / Jean Witt7-6, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesLynn Dukes / Gwen McElveen vs Kay Zobrist / Raquel Lastimoso0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesPaige Weiland / Christine Sari vs Lyndy Graham / Mary Lynn Lee2-6, 3-6
2026-02-08vs PD55/Grant-Cassidy/BYPLost 12
L#1 DoublesGwen McElveen / Marie Player vs Shannon Grant / Tracie Cassidy4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesLynn Dukes / Beth Reames vs Shelly Brand / Jeannie Gainey4-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesMary Lisa McGill / Denise Weeks vs Merryn Weaver / Gee Whetsel7-5, 6-4
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 standings4 teams · 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1PD 3.5W 55 & Over (Graham)7120414180
2PD55/Grant-Cassidy/BYP53121226203
3PD (W) 3.5W 55 & Over (Siegal)44131128224
4PD55/Dukes/PTC2691532236

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 2.97 estimated across 8 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.

Christine Sari
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.21
Marie Player
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.07
Beth Reames
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #3 Doubles 14% · published 3.5
3.06
Paige Weiland
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.03
Lynn Dukes
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
3.02
Gwen McElveen
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published
2.98
Mary Lisa McGill
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.79
Denise Weeks
published 3
2.58
Noreen Compton
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Lillian Holladay
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.

Lynn Dukes + Paige Weiland7256% games+0.9% vs expected
Marie Player + Gwen McElveen6254% games−3.5% vs expected
Lynn Dukes + Beth Reames2342% games−9.8% vs expected
Paige Weiland + Christine Sari1443% gamesnot enough data
Gwen McElveen + Beth Reames5069% gamesnot enough data
Marie Player + Beth Reames213 matchesnot enough data
Paige Weiland + Gwen McElveen033 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
Christine Sari
2W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Marie Player
47W–31L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%7%93%
3.21
3.5
Beth Reames
15W–11L career · 7 lines in 2026
31%69%<1%
3.07
Paige Weiland
11W–14L career · 7 lines in 2026
32%68%<1%
3.06
Lynn Dukes
15W–13L career · 6 lines in 2026
42%58%<1%
3.03
Gwen McElveen
13W–10L career · 7 lines in 2026
44%56%<1%
3.02
Mary Lisa McGill
7W–5L career · 4 lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
2.98
3
Denise Weeks
2W–1L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.79
Noreen Compton
2W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
27%72%<1%
2.58
Lillian Holladay
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2026
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.