Teams

Edwards-Green/40s/3.0/PAC Day

2025 Man · Cov Adult 40 & Over - Women Day

15 players · average NTRP 3.00 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →

Flight standings for Cov Adult 40 & Over - Women Day 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 3.04 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.

3.09
Crissy Green
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
3.05
Ana Perdigao
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.97
Laura Bonanno
usually #2 Doubles 39%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Debra DeLony
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Fran Dominique
usually #3 Doubles 48%, also #2 Doubles 36% · published
Gail Miller
usually #1 Doubles 61%, also #3 Doubles 28% · published
Joelle Cuevas
usually #3 Doubles 54%, also #1 Doubles 27% · published
Kim Kocken
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published
Kim LeBlanc
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Lauren Ortis
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #3 Doubles 14% · published
Mary Glaviano
usually #3 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Melanie Olinde
usually #3 Doubles 45%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Merritt Edwards
usually #3 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 31% · published
Stacey Monaghan
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Trollie Estes
usually #2 Doubles 39%, also #3 Doubles 35% · 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.

Kim Kocken + Lauren Ortis4156% gamesnot enough data
Gail Miller + Trollie Estes224 matchesnot enough data
Fran Dominique + Lauren Ortis314 matchesnot enough data
Merritt Edwards + Lauren Ortis134 matchesnot enough data
Gail Miller + Kim Kocken123 matchesnot enough data
Melanie Olinde + Joelle Cuevas123 matchesnot enough data
Kim Kocken + Joelle Cuevas123 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
Crissy Green
30W–11L career · 15 lines in 2025
<1%26%74%
3.09
3
Ana Perdigao
12W–13L career · 11 lines in 2025
<1%37%63%
3.05
Laura Bonanno
21W–16L career · 18 lines in 2025
<1%59%41%
2.97
3
Debra DeLony
0W–6L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Fran Dominique
27W–26L career · 31 lines in 2025
not enough data
Gail Miller
24W–34L career · 36 lines in 2025
not enough data
Joelle Cuevas
26W–29L career · 26 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kim Kocken
37W–25L career · 37 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kim LeBlanc
6W–6L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Lauren Ortis
14W–12L career · 14 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary Glaviano
4W–5L career · 7 lines in 2025
not enough data
Melanie Olinde
8W–28L career · 20 lines in 2025
not enough data
Merritt Edwards
29W–18L career · 26 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stacey Monaghan
10W–10L career · 12 lines in 2025
not enough data
Trollie Estes
15W–8L career · 23 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.