Teams

3-MPanek-HR

2023 Eno River Combo 65 & Over · Eno River 65 & Over Combo 6.5 Women Day

12 players · average NTRP 3.10 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-10-06vs 2-JHagerty-HVF 65Split 11
L#1 DoublesJudy Croan / Wendy McCorkle vs Anne Brady / Karen Heinemann6-7, 5-7
W#2 DoublesCindy Cleary / Joelle Romac vs Jennifer Sykes / Barbara St Clair6-3, 6-3
2023-09-01vs 2-JHagerty-HVF 65Lost 01
L#1 DoublesMonica Kolzet / Joelle Romac vs Claire Blackwelder / Kathy Reedy0-6, 3-6
2023-08-25vs 1-DWebb-Eno 65Lost 02
L#1 DoublesWendy McCorkle / Judy Croan vs Elaine Yeh / Janice Clayton4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJoelle Romac / Rebecca Georgi vs Pat Rowe / Theresa Rosario-Jansen6-7, 3-6
2023-08-11vs 1-DWebb-Eno 65Lost 01
L#2 DoublesJoelle Romac / Monica Kolzet vs Denise Heinze / Barbara Howe4-6, 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 Eno River 65 & Over Combo 6.5 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 2.77 estimated across 9 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.

3.03
Joelle Romac
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.89
Judy Croan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.84
Mary Panek
published
2.81
Rebecca Georgi
published
2.79
Sandra Herring
published
2.65
Claire Bassett
published 3
2.64
Cindy Cleary
published 3
2.63
Kim Craig
published
2.62
Helen Youngblood
published 3
Martha Schulwitz
published
Monica Kolzet
published
Wendy McCorkle
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.

Mary Panek + Joelle Romac4549% games+5.4% vs expected
Rebecca Georgi + Mary Panek1439% games−5.1% vs expected
Mary Panek + Sandra Herring134 matchesnot enough data
Judy Croan + Cindy Cleary044 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.

3.5
Joelle Romac
49W–95L career · 4 lines in 2023
41%59%<1%
3.03
3
Judy Croan
49W–54L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%80%20%
2.89
Mary Panek
17W–23L career · no lines in 2023
<1%88%12%
2.84
Rebecca Georgi
12W–16L career · no lines in 2023
1%92%7%
2.81
Sandra Herring
4W–7L career · no lines in 2023
1%93%5%
2.79
3
Claire Bassett
2W–13L career · no lines in 2023
12%88%<1%
2.65
3
Cindy Cleary
7W–23L career · no lines in 2023
14%85%<1%
2.64
Kim Craig
3W–8L career · no lines in 2023
16%84%<1%
2.63
3
Helen Youngblood
3W–22L career · no lines in 2023
18%82%<1%
2.62
Martha Schulwitz
3W–9L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Monica Kolzet
3W–3L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Wendy McCorkle
4W–6L career · no lines in 2023
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.