Teams

MCAC:Taylor:Wright

2025 Cape Adult 40 & Over Women · 4.0 Women 1

18 players · average NTRP 3.94 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

View scouting list →
Schedule10 played
2025-07-21vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerLost 12
W#1 DoublesBonnie Loedel / Pamela Feeney vs Jane Craig / Lauriene Morin7-5, 3-5, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSoraya Stevens / Terri Pearson vs Merry Abbott / Sharon Forman6-3, 5-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMegan Farrell / Denise Wright vs Shea Kinney / Ellen Sicinski1-6, 6-2, 1-0
2025-07-14vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerWon 21
W#1 DoublesPamela Feeney / Jeannine Hoyt vs Patricia Cerro / Lauriene Morin6-0, 6-3
W#2 DoublesTerri Pearson / Maria LeStage vs Daryl Angelini / Amy Rice4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSoraya Stevens / Megan Farrell vs Merry Abbott / Shea Kinney6-7, 2-3
2025-07-07vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerWon 21
W#1 DoublesPamela Feeney / Terri Pearson vs Stephanie Bush-Brown / Doris O'Sullivan0-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesBonnie Loedel / Pamela Peek vs Jane Craig / Shea Kinney6-0, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesGail Cohen / Abbe Seldin vs Merry Abbott / Elsbeth Rowaan0-6, 2-6
2025-06-30vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerLost 04
L#1 DoublesPamela Feeney / Terri Pearson vs Jane Craig / Doris O'Sullivan1-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesGail Cohen vs Heather Palmer5-7, 2-1, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMaria LeStage / Christine Taylor vs Daryl Angelini / Patricia Cerro4-6, 2-3
L#3 DoublesAnn Cami / Baysie Wightman vs Sharon Forman / Ellen Sicinski4-6, 2-6
2025-06-23vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerLost 12
L#1 DoublesItsuko Herrema / Jeannine Hoyt vs Jane Craig / Doris O'Sullivan4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesSherry Crockett / Terri Pearson vs Ro Nelson / Ellen Sicinski6-2, 6-2
L#3 DoublesPamela Feeney / Pamela Peek vs Carolyn McGarr-Lee / Maria Sarver6-0, 2-6, 0-1
2025-06-16vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerLost 04
L#1 DoublesBonnie Loedel / Christine Taylor vs Stephanie Bush-Brown / Jane Craig4-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesGail Cohen vs Doris O'Sullivan2-6, 5-6
L#2 DoublesPamela Feeney / Denise Wright vs Sharon Forman / Ellen Sicinski4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesAnn Cami / Abbe Seldin vs Daryl Angelini / Patricia Cerro2-6, 2-6
2025-06-09vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerWon 31
W#1 DoublesBonnie Loedel / Christine Taylor vs Jane Craig / Doris O'Sullivan6-2, 1-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesItsuko Herrema vs Heather Palmer7-6, 4-2
W#2 DoublesBaysie Wightman / Pamela Feeney vs Patricia Cerro / Daryl Angelini7-6, 1-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSherry Crockett / Terri Pearson vs Stephanie Bush-Brown / Carolyn McGarr-Lee6-7, 2-3
2025-06-02vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerWon 31
W#1 DoublesBonnie Loedel / Christine Taylor vs Jane Craig / Elsbeth Rowaan7-5, 4-2
L#1 SinglesItsuko Herrema vs Doris O'Sullivan3-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesPamela Feeney / Baysie Wightman vs Daryl Angelini / Patricia Cerro6-2, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSherry Crockett / Terri Pearson vs Maria Sarver / Merry Abbott6-0, 6-1
2025-05-19vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerLost 13
L#1 DoublesBonnie Loedel / Christine Taylor vs Stephanie Bush-Brown / Jane Craig7-5, 1-3, 0-1
L#1 SinglesColeen Robbie vs Doris O'Sullivan1-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesPamela Feeney / Denise Wright vs Daryl Angelini / Amy Rice7-6, 0-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesGail Cohen / Abbe Seldin vs Sharon Forman / Ellen Sicinski7-6, 1-3, 0-1
2025-05-12vs MCAC:MissHits:Craig:PalmerLost 12
L#1 DoublesJeannine Hoyt / Bonnie Loedel vs Doris O'Sullivan / Jane Craig6-7, 5-2, 0-1
W#2 DoublesPamela Feeney / Baysie Wightman vs Stephanie Bush-Brown / Ro Nelson6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesAnn Cami / Megan Farrell vs Carolyn McGarr-Lee / Elsbeth Rowaan2-6, 5-2, 1-0
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 · 4.0 Women 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MCAC:MissHits:Craig:Palmer73251540325
2MCAC:Taylor:Wright37152560369

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 3.65 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.

3.92
Bonnie Loedel
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published 4
3.84
Maria LeStage
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Ann Cami
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.75
Baysie Wightman
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
Christine Taylor
published 4
Coleen Robbie
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
Denise Wright
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
Itsuko Herrema
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.61
Pamela Feeney
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.61
Sherry Crockett
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.56
Megan Farrell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.55
Gail Cohen
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 4
3.34
Abbe Seldin
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Jeannine Hoyt
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Joanne Mahoney
published
Pamela Peek
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Soraya Stevens
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Terri Pearson
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 29% · 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.

Baysie Wightman + Pamela Feeney5156% games+8.2% vs expected
Joanne Mahoney + Baysie Wightman2537% games−2.4% vs expected
Maria LeStage + Gail Cohen6076% gamesnot enough data
Sherry Crockett + Terri Pearson224 matchesnot enough data
Sherry Crockett + Pamela Feeney134 matchesnot enough data
Megan Farrell + Denise Wright134 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
Bonnie Loedel
27W–26L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%73%27%
3.92
Maria LeStage
45W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%88%11%
3.84
4
Ann Cami
7W–6L career · type A · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Baysie Wightman
14W–26L career · 4 lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Christine Taylor
25W–10L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Coleen Robbie
17W–12L career · type S · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
4
Denise Wright
30W–61L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Itsuko Herrema
7W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Pamela Feeney
112W–106L career · 10 lines in 2025
19%81%<1%
3.61
Sherry Crockett
48W–59L career · 3 lines in 2025
21%79%<1%
3.61
Megan Farrell
7W–23L career · 3 lines in 2025
33%67%<1%
3.56
4
Gail Cohen
32W–13L career · 4 lines in 2025
36%64%<1%
3.55
3.5
Abbe Seldin
1W–7L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%89%10%
3.34
Jeannine Hoyt
4W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Joanne Mahoney
23W–30L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Pamela Peek
13W–15L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Soraya Stevens
61W–34L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Terri Pearson
5W–8L career · 7 lines in 2025
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.