Teams

Lakewood National Harper

2026 Sarasota Adult 55 & Over Winter · 8.0 W Thursday

11 players · average NTRP 4.00 / REGION_5

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2026-03-12vs LWR SosaSplit 11
W#1 DoublesMary Gill / Sandy Harper vs Lu Circelli / Karen Huffman6-4, 6-7, 1-0
L#2 DoublesBeth Barrett / Tressa Ridge vs Christine Tosti / Bernadette Waterman4-6, 1-6
2026-03-05vs LWR HagopianLost 03
L#1 DoublesMary Gill / Cindy Markowitz vs Christine Handel / Karen Nicholson6-7, 0-6
L#2 DoublesAbigail Stephens / Beth Barrett vs Heidi Cox / Gina Hagopian2-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesTressa Ridge / Susan Schumacher vs Barbara Cogen / Marcia Frost6-7, 5-7
2026-02-26vs Sarasota/DavyLost 12
W#1 DoublesDiana Blitz / Mary Gill vs Tambra Ford / Ann Davy6-1, 6-0
L#2 DoublesCindy Markowitz / Beth Barrett vs Julie Boruff / Linda Radovich4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesSandy Harper / Kelly Depalo vs Cathy Maler / Sheila Engert4-6, 6-7
2026-02-19vs River Strand CurleLost 12
W#1 DoublesCindy Markowitz / Mary Gill vs Penny Franklin / Annmarie Curle6-4, 7-5
L#2 DoublesAbigail Stephens / Sandy Harper vs Kara Beene / Chris Poole3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesJodi Fields / Tressa Ridge vs Bernadette King / Lynn Bucknam0-6, 1-6
2026-02-12vs Plantation DipierroWon 21
W#1 DoublesCindy Markowitz / Mary Gill vs Ana Areosa / Connie Weiss7-5, 6-3
W#2 DoublesSandy Harper / Kelly Depalo vs Diane Crews / Janet Kramer6-4, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesAbigail Stephens / Jodi Fields vs Diane DeGurian / Yvonne Walker6-7, 2-6
2026-02-06vs Lake Club A Swing and A PrayerWon 21
L#1 DoublesMary Gill / Diana Blitz vs Karen Dale / Jacqueline Borden7-6, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKelly Depalo / Abigail Stephens vs Debra Hair / Shelley Finley6-0, 5-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesBeth Barrett / Sandy Harper vs Sonia Valdes / Joanna Hoffstein6-3, 5-7, 1-0
2026-01-29vs LBK Public Island GirlsWon 21
W#1 DoublesCindy Markowitz / Diana Blitz vs Margaret West / Karen Adams2-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKelly Depalo / Beth Barrett vs Jackie Gibbins / Elizabeth Scheible6-7, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSandy Harper / Lori Yarusi vs Mary Jane Waite / Brenda Baril4-6, 7-6, 0-1
2026-01-23vs Palm Aire SeiderLost 12
W#1 DoublesCindy Markowitz / Diana Blitz vs Maureen Rasp-Glose / Hong Li6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesSandy Harper / Beth Barrett vs Laura Peters / Judith Lubbers1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAbigail Stephens / Mary Gill vs Kristin Knous / Lynn Deuitch5-7, 4-6
2026-01-22vs Waterford LamyWon 21
W#1 DoublesDiana Blitz / Mary Gill vs Lorraine K McBride / Debra Day6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesAbigail Stephens / Kelly Depalo vs Barbara Belanger / Lynn Inganamort7-6, 6-1
L#3 DoublesJodi Fields / Lori Yarusi vs Joan Floyd / Mitzi Lamy5-7, 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 8.0 W Thursday 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 3.63 estimated across 8 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.

3.91
Mary Gill
usually #1 Doubles 88%, also #3 Doubles 13% · published
3.88
Diana Blitz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Abigail Stephens
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.66
Kelly Depalo
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.63
Cindy Markowitz
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.62
Sandy Harper
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published
3.55
Beth Barrett
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.08
Tressa Ridge
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
Jodi Fields
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Lori Yarusi
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Schumacher
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.

Kelly Depalo + Tressa Ridge303 matchesnot enough data
Kelly Depalo + Abigail Stephens303 matchesnot enough data
Cindy Markowitz + Mary Gill213 matchesnot enough data
Mary Gill + Diana Blitz213 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.

Mary Gill
13W–5L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%73%26%
3.91
4
Diana Blitz
47W–39L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.88
4
Abigail Stephens
9W–11L career · 6 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.72
4
Kelly Depalo
74W–104L career · type A · 5 lines in 2026
13%86%1%
3.66
4
Cindy Markowitz
95W–88L career · 6 lines in 2026
18%82%<1%
3.63
Sandy Harper
16W–10L career · 7 lines in 2026
20%79%<1%
3.62
4
Beth Barrett
2W–4L career · type S · 6 lines in 2026
35%65%<1%
3.55
Tressa Ridge
97W–73L career · 6 lines in 2026
>99%<1%<1%
3.08
Jodi Fields
0W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Lori Yarusi
1W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Susan Schumacher
1W–1L career · 1 line 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.