← Teams

N OR-VTC-Gaylor

2023 Adult 55 & Over · 7.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.56 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.36 estimated across 7 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.

3.77
Lorna Goth
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.58
Hong Allen
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.42
Karen Pickering
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
—
Denise Dawkins
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
—
Kim Hamlik
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.24
Janet Mills
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.18
Kelley Gaylor
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.16
Annie Sumpter
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.15
Julie Gorecki
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
Results10 ties
2023-06-24Lost 0–1
L#1 DoublesMichele Beaman / Julie Gorecki vs Linda Brummett / Leona De Rocco6-4, 6-2
2022-12-04Won 1–0
W#2 DoublesKelley Gaylor / Julie Gorecki vs Mary Logsdon / Stacey Burkhart6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2022-11-20Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesTrylla Lembke / Lorna Goth vs Julie Arness / Shirley Derby7-5, 7-6
W#2 DoublesKelley Gaylor / Tina Clancy vs Christine Hattenhauer / Tuni Stecker6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesKim Hamlik / Julie Gorecki vs Linda Underwood / Donna Weyand6-2, 6-1
2022-11-19Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesDenise Dawkins / Kelley Gaylor vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesHong Allen / Lorna Goth vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-11-06Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesAnnie Sumpter / Pamela Lagielski vs Paula Watt / Kerri Monello2-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesLorna Goth / Julie Gorecki vs Brooke Thompson / Barbara Griffin6-4, 6-0
2022-11-05Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesKaren Pickering / Hong Allen vs Catherine Leedy / Kim Wright7-5, 6-1
W#2 DoublesLorna Goth / Tina Clancy vs Deb Garris / Janae Pyle1-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#3 DoublesPamela Lagielski / Annie Sumpter vs Carolyn Bachhuber / Alison Davis0-6, 7-5, 1-0
2022-10-30Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesMichele Beaman / Karen Pickering vs Karen Groenweghe / Frederique Lavios6-2, 6-0
W#2 DoublesTina Clancy / Janet Mills vs Janet Hostetler / Kathi Gray6-2, 6-3
L#3 DoublesAnnie Sumpter / Pamela Lagielski vs Christine Taylor / Colleen Hamilton6-4, 6-7, 1-0
2022-10-29Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesDenise Dawkins / Kelley Gaylor vs Katherine Lomartire / Cynthia Ross-Brockett6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesTina Clancy / Janet Mills vs Laurence Dupray / Sandi Martes6-4, 6-0
W#3 DoublesKaren Pickering / Lorna Goth vs Diana Blebea / Stephanie Arnheim6-0, 6-1
2022-10-15Won 2–0
W#2 DoublesKim Hamlik / Hong Allen vs Nicole Floyd / Garrene Mcgale6-4, 6-1
W#3 DoublesTrylla Lembke / Denise Dawkins vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-09-25Won 2–0
W#2 DoublesKelley Gaylor / Julie Gorecki vs Claudia Belindean / Ramona Kirsch6-2, 7-6
W#3 DoublesMichele Beaman / Karen Pickering vs Tammy Kitterman / Susan McMullin6-1, 6-0
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.
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.

4
Lorna Goth
124W–51L career
1%99%0%
3.77
3.5
Hong Allen
39W–50L career
0%58%42%
3.58
3.5
Karen Pickering
156W–123L career
0%95%5%
3.42
3.5
Denise Dawkins
59W–54L career
not enough data
—
3.5
Kim Hamlik
24W–44L career
not enough data
—
3.5
Janet Mills
66W–75L career
1%99%0%
3.24
3.5
Kelley Gaylor
68W–64L career
10%89%1%
3.18
3.5
Annie Sumpter
22W–43L career
6%94%0%
3.16
3.5
Julie Gorecki
33W–22L career
11%89%0%
3.15

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.