Teams

PDavis-DUR

2026 Eno River Singles 55 & Over · 55 & Over Singles 3.0 Women Evening

6 players · average NTRP 2.70 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-06-23vs KCabelka-HRSplit 11
W#1 SinglesMatalaba Napier vs Jan ORegan6-3, 6-2
L#2 SinglesJudith Hagopian-Edwards vs Michelle Koeneke0-6, 1-6
2026-06-16vs YDeaver-DURLost 03
L#1 SinglesCamille Blommer vs Lula Melton1-6, 3-6
L#2 SinglesVickie Gibbs vs Yolanda Deaver0-6, 0-6
L#3 SinglesJudith Hagopian-Edwards vs Edith Becerra2-6, 4-6
2026-06-09vs CPeterson-HVCCLost 12
L#1 SinglesCamille Blommer vs Barbara Wilhelm2-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesAmanda Laird vs Cecily Peterson2-6, 0-6
W#3 SinglesMatalaba Napier vs Elizabeth Everett6-3, 6-2
2026-06-02vs DBaker-TOCHLost 03
L#1 SinglesCamille Blommer vs Kim Hutter4-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesPamela Howell-Davis vs Liz Schaller4-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 SinglesJudith Hagopian-Edwards vs Debbie Baker0-6, 1-6
2026-05-26vs CPeterson-HVCCLost 12
L#1 SinglesCamille Blommer vs Deborah Hertzog2-6, 2-6
W#2 SinglesPamela Howell-Davis vs Elizabeth Everett6-3, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 SinglesAmanda Laird vs Courtney Mangum2-6, 4-6
2026-05-19vs KCabelka-HRLost 03
L#1 SinglesCamille Blommer vs Kim Cabelka4-6, 3-6
L#2 SinglesMatalaba Napier vs Michelle Koeneke2-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesJudith Hagopian-Edwards vs Jan ORegan1-6, 3-6
2026-05-12vs MLong-DURLost 02
L#1 SinglesPamela Howell-Davis vs Katie Sanders4-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesJudith Hagopian-Edwards vs Richelle Robinson2-6, 3-6
2026-05-05vs YDeaver-DURLost 02
L#1 SinglesMatalaba Napier vs Diane Allen0-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesAmanda Laird vs Becki Cleveland0-6, 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 55 & Over Singles 3.0 Women Evening 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 2.49 estimated across 6 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.

2.78
Camille Blommer
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
2.62
Matalaba Napier
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 25% · published
2.54
Pamela Howell-Davis
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3
2.36
Vickie Gibbs
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 2.5
2.35
Amanda Laird
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 2.5
2.29
Judith Hagopian-Edwards
usually #3 Singles 60%, also #2 Singles 40% · published 2.5
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.

Matalaba Napier + Judith Hagopian-Edwards123 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
Camille Blommer
73W–74L career · 5 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
2.78
Matalaba Napier
11W–21L career · 4 lines in 2026
20%79%<1%
2.62
3
Pamela Howell-Davis
119W–146L career · 3 lines in 2026
38%61%<1%
2.54
2.5
Vickie Gibbs
54W–74L career · 1 line in 2026
0%84%16%
2.36
2.5
Amanda Laird
9W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%86%14%
2.35
2.5
Judith Hagopian-Edwards
111W–207L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%93%7%
2.29

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.