Teams

Burch/LF 55 & over

2025 TUL ADULT 55 & Over League · 6.0 WOMEN

11 players · average NTRP 2.60 / OKLAHOMA

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 →
Schedule2 played
2025-05-03vs Blue 2: Sacra/LFLost 03
L#1 DoublesJanet Rader / Barbara Evans vs Patricia Stuart / Barb Drotar1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesLizbeth Burch / Jen Turner vs Kelly Wilhelm / Jean Sacra0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesHollis Keeley / Judy Turner vs Stacy Herring / Donna Hazle0-6, 0-6
2025-03-08vs Blue 2: Sacra/LFLost 03
L#1 DoublesJanet Rader / Barbara Evans vs Stacy Herring / Laura Keep4-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesJen Turner / Kitty Morel vs Donna Hazle / Jean Sacra1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesHollis Keeley / Trenna Strauss vs Kay Jones / Patricia Stuart0-6, 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 standings for 6.0 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 2.17 estimated across 5 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.

2.53
Brenda Dunn
published 3
2.23
Barbara Evans
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.19
Donna Weatherl
published 2.5
1.97
Hollis Keeley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
1.92
Cindy Vick
published 2.5
Janet Rader
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Judy Turner
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Kitty Morel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Lizbeth Burch
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Gelwick
published
Trenna Strauss
usually #3 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.

Brenda Dunn + Lizbeth Burch4743% games−9.2% vs expected
Barbara Evans + Lizbeth Burch21635% games−10.9% vs expected
Janet Rader + Lizbeth Burch2733% games−18.1% vs expected
Donna Weatherl + Trenna Strauss1733% gamesnot enough data
Barbara Evans + Janet Rader0633% gamesnot enough data
Judy Turner + Cindy Vick0516% gamesnot enough data
Kitty Morel + Lizbeth Burch044 matchesnot enough data
Kitty Morel + Barbara Evans033 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
Brenda Dunn
9W–19L career · no lines in 2025
42%58%<1%
2.53
2.5
Barbara Evans
8W–72L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%98%2%
2.23
2.5
Donna Weatherl
9W–32L career · no lines in 2025
0%99%1%
2.19
2.5
Hollis Keeley
5W–34L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
1.97
2.5
Cindy Vick
16W–36L career · no lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
1.92
Janet Rader
53W–42L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Judy Turner
3W–52L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Kitty Morel
13W–39L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Lizbeth Burch
16W–80L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Susan Gelwick
0W–12L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Trenna Strauss
7W–25L career · 1 line 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.