Teams

Lagoon Sellers

2026 Spring USTA 55 & Over Day League-Montgomery · 3.0 Women Day

11 players · average NTRP 3.00 / ALABAMA

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 →
Schedule9 played
2026-03-27vs Wynlakes - GarnerLost 12
L#1 DoublesDaisy Zaner / Joan Ensley vs Cathy Garner / Lynn Peck6-4, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesKim McDonald / Mary Weidler vs Carla Rush / Tara Chambliss6-1, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesGina Sellers / Felicia Brooks vs Conitha King / Joan S Brown1-6, 2-6
2026-03-23vs MCC DOWNEY/STEINEKERWon 21
L#1 DoublesKim McDonald / Diane Johnson vs Mandy Carter / Karen Steineker5-7, 3-6
W#2 DoublesKaren Agnello / Mary Weidler vs Katherine Gayden / Martha Aman6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesSharon Woernle / Joan Ensley vs Pat Watkins / Katherine Crum6-1, 7-6
2026-03-19vs Lagoon CannadyWon 21
L#1 DoublesKaren Agnello / Daisy Zaner vs Deborah Langham / Susan Walls6-1, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesJoan Ensley / Mary Weidler vs Kay Cannady / Cheryl Phillips6-1, 6-0
W#3 DoublesGina Sellers / Sharon Woernle vs Judith Heinzman / Patricia Dumas6-4, 6-4
2026-03-09vs Wynlakes - GarnerLost 12
L#1 DoublesKaren Agnello / Kim McDonald vs Joy Darley / Lynn Peck1-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesDiane Johnson / Mary Weidler vs Carmen Lanier / Conitha King7-6, 6-2
L#3 DoublesGina Sellers / Joan Ensley vs Carla Rush / Joan S Brown0-6, 0-6
2026-03-02vs MCC DOWNEY/STEINEKERLost 12
W#1 DoublesKaren Agnello / Kim McDonald vs Martha Aman / Katherine Crum6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesRegina Dinger / Sharon Woernle vs Katherine Gayden / Sheila Mitchell6-3, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesGina Sellers / Mary Weidler vs Shirley Downey / Karen Steineker3-6, 2-6
2026-03-01vs Lagoon CannadyWon 30
W#1 DoublesKaren Agnello / Daisy Zaner vs Kay Cannady / Jennifer Bennett6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesRegina Dinger / Joan Ensley vs Cheryl Phillips / Patricia Dumas6-1, 6-0
W#3 DoublesGina Sellers / Sharon Woernle vs Vanessa Edwards / Vickie Wilson6-4, 6-3
2026-02-16vs Wynlakes - GarnerWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Agnello / Kim McDonald vs Carmen Lanier / Carla Rush6-0, 7-6
2026-02-09vs MCC DOWNEY/STEINEKERSplit 11
W#1 DoublesKaren Agnello / Daisy Zaner vs Pat Watkins / Sheila Mitchell6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesRegina Dinger / Felicia Brooks vs Katherine Gayden / Katie Espy6-7, 1-6
2026-02-02vs Lagoon CannadyWon 21
L#1 DoublesKaren Agnello / Daisy Zaner vs Susan Walls / Jennifer Bennett4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDiane Johnson / Kim McDonald vs Deborah Langham / Supin Scott6-3, 7-6
W#3 DoublesMary Weidler / Joan Ensley vs Vanessa Edwards / Vickie Wilson6-1, 6-2
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 3.0 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 2.89 estimated across 11 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.

3.41
Kim McDonald
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.21
Daisy Zaner
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.10
DEBRA SLEDGE
published 3
3.05
Karen Agnello
usually #1 Doubles 88%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published
2.87
Sharon Woernle
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
2.82
Regina Dinger
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.81
Mary Weidler
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.76
Joan Ensley
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.72
Jewell Pitts
published
2.67
Felicia Brooks
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.43
Gina Sellers
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.

Karen Agnello + Felicia Brooks5159% games+8.4% vs expected
Karen Agnello + Daisy Zaner13463% games+4.6% vs expected
Regina Dinger + Sharon Woernle5552% games+2.3% vs expected
DEBRA SLEDGE + Karen Agnello6266% games+1.9% vs expected
Joan Ensley + Regina Dinger121647% games+0.2% vs expected
Joan Ensley + Sharon Woernle2543% games−1.5% vs expected
Gina Sellers + Karen Agnello6846% games−2.2% vs expected
Gina Sellers + Kim McDonald1442% gamesnot 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.

Kim McDonald
23W–20L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.41
3
Daisy Zaner
43W–19L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%7%93%
3.21
3
DEBRA SLEDGE
36W–23L career · no lines in 2026
<1%24%76%
3.10
Karen Agnello
61W–32L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%37%63%
3.05
Sharon Woernle
39W–34L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
2.87
Regina Dinger
40W–57L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
2.82
Mary Weidler
19W–15L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
2.81
Joan Ensley
37W–60L career · 6 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
2.76
Jewell Pitts
8W–29L career · no lines in 2026
6%92%2%
2.72
Felicia Brooks
20W–52L career · 2 lines in 2026
12%87%1%
2.67
Gina Sellers
23W–48L career · 5 lines in 2026
70%30%<1%
2.43

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.