Teams

BBTC Austin

2026 Combo Doubles 55 & Over-GC · Women 7.5

11 players · average NTRP 3.83 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-08-19vs Montjoy 55_DHWon 21
W#1 DoublesAmanda Letonoff / Rebecca Mayfield vs Jennifer Hailes / Lucy Stevens3-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesEdye Austin / Gwen Urbati vs Nicole Montagnet / Kimberly Keel7-6, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKathleen Marlowe / Leslie Collins vs Mary Kay Walk / Courtney Schiro6-1, 6-1
2026-08-04vs TOCC Render-Leach - 55sWon 30
W#1 DoublesAmanda Letonoff / Edye Austin vs Shari Pol / Charlene Langlinais6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesPaula Moore / Gwen Urbati vs Cynthia Render-Leach / Beth Gordin6-4, 3-0
W#3 DoublesKathleen Marlowe / Nancy Storey vs Vona Wawryszczuk / Odile Million2-6, 6-2, 1-0
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 Women 7.5 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 3.27 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.

3.49
Amanda Letonoff
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.35
Cathy Saunier
published 4
3.34
Edye Austin
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.34
Kathleen Marlowe
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.32
Dena Karr
published 3.5
3.19
Gwen Urbati
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.18
Shelly Williams
published
3.14
Linda Benigno
published
3.09
Rebecca Mayfield
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Nancy Storey
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Paula Moore
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.

Dena Karr + Gwen Urbati10065% games+18.7% vs expected
Gwen Urbati + Edye Austin9750% games+1.8% vs expected
Edye Austin + Cathy Saunier314 matchesnot enough data
Kathleen Marlowe + Rebecca Mayfield213 matchesnot enough data
Cathy Saunier + Rebecca Mayfield123 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.

4
Amanda Letonoff
32W–18L career · 2 lines in 2026
52%48%<1%
3.49
4
Cathy Saunier
27W–22L career · no lines in 2026
85%15%<1%
3.35
Edye Austin
23W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%86%13%
3.34
Kathleen Marlowe
24W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%1%99%
3.34
3.5
Dena Karr
45W–14L career · no lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.32
Gwen Urbati
54W–26L career · 2 lines in 2026
8%90%1%
3.19
Shelly Williams
30W–31L career · no lines in 2026
<1%10%90%
3.18
Linda Benigno
42W–19L career · no lines in 2026
<1%15%85%
3.14
Rebecca Mayfield
42W–33L career · 1 line in 2026
26%74%<1%
3.09
Nancy Storey
6W–3L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Paula Moore
1W–1L career · no lines in 2026
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.