Teams

Indy A55 7.0W MRC Vorhees

Spring USTA Central Indiana Adult 55 & Over · CIN Indy 55 & Over 7.0 Women, W

8 players · average NTRP 3.50 / CENTRAL INDIANA

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 →
Schedule8 played
2026-05-30vs Indy A55 7.0W IND AckermanWon 30
W#1 DoublesJini Morgan / Kristi Knapp vs Leyna Mulholland / Kriss Bowes6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesMarianne Vorhees / Jennifer Walton vs Chahrzad Montrose / Darci Ackerman6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesBarbara Lockhart / Michelle Bergren vs Jan Harris / Cynthia Rathjen6-1, 6-0
2026-05-16vs Indy A55 7.0W IRCD HalleWon 30
W#1 DoublesJini Morgan / Kristi Knapp vs Michelle Wilson / Ann Mouser6-1, 0-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesGayle Flannery / Amanda Rammel vs Amanda Bates / Karen Halle6-4, 6-4
W#3 DoublesRoberta Terranova / Carole Clohessy vs Sue Nonweiler / Misty Brown6-4, 6-1
2026-05-09vs Indy A55 7.0W CRC NelsonLost 03
L#1 DoublesMarianne Vorhees / Jennifer Walton vs Jennifer Crouter-Clouse / Julie Dunscomb6-7, 5-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesKristi Knapp / Barbara Lockhart vs Karen Fennerty / Michelle Burns2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesAmanda Rammel / Michelle Bergren vs Ann Meunier / Jackie Hudnall6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2026-05-02vs Indy A55 7.0W IRCD MelcherWon 20
W#1 DoublesJini Morgan / Kristi Knapp vs Elizabeth Ball / Allison Gritton7-5, 6-4
W#2 DoublesAmanda Rammel / Gayle Flannery vs Lyn Reed / Paula Deemer6-0, 6-2
2026-04-25vs Indy A55 7.0W IRCD PruittLost 12
W#1 DoublesMarianne Vorhees / Jennifer Walton vs Kikuko Campbell / Jill Chlystun6-1, 6-3
L#2 DoublesCarole Clohessy / Roberta Terranova vs Linda Burwell / Kathleen Golightly2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesTammy Neal / Amanda Rammel vs Belinda Denning / Yan Ma2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-04-18vs Indy A55 7.0W IRCD CookWon 10
W#1 DoublesBarbara Lockhart / Amanda Rammel vs Linda Cook / Kristy Lombardo6-1, 6-0
2026-04-11vs Indy A55 7.0W IRCE AkersLost 02
L#1 DoublesTeresa Keller / Kristi Knapp vs Carmen Cudiamat / Cynthia Heinbaugh1-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesBarbara Lockhart / Gayle Flannery vs Lorinne Banister / Ann Osuntokun2-6, 3-6
2026-03-28vs Indy A55 7.0W IRCD DaltonLost 12
L#1 DoublesTeresa Keller / Jennifer Walton vs Kathleen Eldridge / Cheryl Miller6-7, 2-1, 0-1
W#2 DoublesGayle Flannery / Amanda Rammel vs Kimberly Dalton / Deborah Kuratko6-2, 6-3
L#3 DoublesCarole Clohessy / Roberta Terranova vs Mary Coyne / Tracy Fulling6-4, 2-6, 0-1
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 standings9 teams · CIN Indy 55 & Over 7.0 Women, W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Indy A55 7.0W IRCD Pruitt8020412149
2Indy A55 7.0W IRCD Dalton7118618179
3Indy A55 7.0W IRCE Akers53141020166
4Indy A55 7.0W CRC Nelson53141026209
5Indy A55 7.0W MRC Vorhees4415921176
6Indy A55 7.0W IRCD Halle35101429218
7Indy A55 7.0W IRCD Melcher3591533235
8Indy A55 7.0W IRCD Cook1732143279
9Indy A55 7.0W IND Ackerman0851939255

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.30 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.

3.55
Carole Clohessy
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.51
Teresa Keller
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.46
Amanda Rammel
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.25
Marianne Vorhees
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.18
Barbara Lockhart
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.07
Kristi Knapp
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.06
Jennifer Walton
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Tammy Neal
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.

Marianne Vorhees + Barbara Lockhart7357% games+11.3% vs expected
Marianne Vorhees + Jennifer Walton5553% games+6.8% vs expected
Marianne Vorhees + Carole Clohessy5649% games+4.4% vs expected
Kristi Knapp + Teresa Keller4250% games+3.1% vs expected
Marianne Vorhees + Teresa Keller9066% gamesnot enough data
Kristi Knapp + Jennifer Walton3345% gamesnot enough data
Barbara Lockhart + Amanda Rammel4266% gamesnot enough data
Marianne Vorhees + Kristi Knapp224 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
Carole Clohessy
105W–77L career · 7 lines in 2026
36%64%<1%
3.55
Teresa Keller
166W–49L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.51
3.5
Amanda Rammel
21W–18L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%60%40%
3.46
Marianne Vorhees
158W–120L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%4%96%
3.25
3.5
Barbara Lockhart
96W–64L career · 4 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.18
Kristi Knapp
41W–42L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%32%68%
3.07
3
Jennifer Walton
35W–32L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%32%68%
3.06
Tammy Neal
15W–29L 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.