Teams

Strong/40/4.0/WD/LCRC

2025 Lake Charles Adult 40 & Over - Women · 4.0 LC (40&O) Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.50 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-03-21vs Lanier/40/4.0/WD/LCRCSplit 11
L#1 DoublesNancy Clements / Jaime Crawford vs Melissa Padgett / Jackie Heinen2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesKimberly Crowe / Marsha Fruge vs Casey Thompson / Trena Soileau1-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-02-27vs Lanier/40/4.0/WD/LCRCSplit 11
L#1 DoublesAudra Jackson / Nancy Clements vs Elizabeth Martel / Casey Thompson6-7, 2-6
W#2 DoublesMathilda Perez / Kimberly Crowe vs Laurie Herrera / Jackie Heinen6-4, 7-5
2025-02-16vs Lanier/40/4.0/WD/LCRCLost 03
L#1 DoublesJaime Crawford / Marsha Fruge vs Melissa Padgett / Amanda Brinkman3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesDana MacK / Mary Ann Treme vs Lee Lanier / Casey Thompson2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesKim Strong / Mathilda Perez vs Ana Denison / Trena Soileau3-6, 2-6
2025-02-16vs Lanier/40/4.0/WD/LCRCLost 02
L#1 DoublesKim Strong / Mathilda Perez vs Ana Denison / Trena Soileau2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesNancy Clements / Mary Ann Treme vs Jackie Heinen / Elizabeth Martel1-6, 4-6
2025-02-02vs Lanier/40/4.0/WD/LCRCLost 12
L#1 DoublesMarsha Fruge / Kimberly Crowe vs Melissa Padgett / Carrie Kuehn1-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesKim Strong / Mathilda Perez vs Casey Thompson / Lee Lanier1-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#3 DoublesAudra Jackson / Dana MacK vs Amanda Brinkman / Laurie Herrera0-6, 2-6
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 4.0 LC (40&O) Women 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 3.24 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.

3.35
Nancy Clements
usually #2 Doubles 38%, also #1 Singles 38% · published
3.19
Audra Jackson
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.17
Dana MacK
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Jaime Crawford
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Kim Strong
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Kimberly Crowe
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Marsha Fruge
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Mary Ann Treme
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Mathilda Perez
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · 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.

Mathilda Perez + Kim Strong123 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.

Nancy Clements
11W–15L career · 8 lines in 2025
1%85%14%
3.35
3.5
Audra Jackson
16W–18L career · 5 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.19
3.5
Dana MacK
7W–8L career · 6 lines in 2025
11%88%1%
3.17
Jaime Crawford
0W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kim Strong
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kimberly Crowe
2W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Marsha Fruge
1W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary Ann Treme
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mathilda Perez
2W–2L career · 4 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.