Teams

ACAC Linderman

2022 Richmond Adult 55 & Over Weeknight Women · Richmond Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.31 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2022-08-11Lost 01
L#1 DoublesJeanette Kim / Ann Yates vs Kathryn Williams / Linda Wood4-6, 5-4, 0-1
2022-08-09vs TDC CarlyleLost 01
L#1 DoublesSandra Holahan / Dawn MacHonis vs Margaret Duke / Nancy Mihalko0-6, 3-6
2022-07-11vs RMC FlowersWon 20
W#1 DoublesSandra Holahan / Dawn MacHonis vs Kathy Flowers / Victoria Galiffa6-4, 6-0
W#2 DoublesCrystal Hull / Jeanette Kim vs Mona Stahling / Brenda Tyson6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-06-20vs Raintree Bryan / Bullard 7.0Won 20
W#1 DoublesSandra Holahan / Sandra Neumann vs Pam Koch / Molly Smith3-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJeanette Kim / Carolyn Hassan vs Peggy Bryan / Rebecca Schwartz6-2, 6-1
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 standings for Richmond Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women 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 2.96 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.

3.29
Diane Linderman
published 3.5
Jeanette Kim
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.10
Dawn MacHonis
published 3.5
3.10
Sandra Holahan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.95
Hilary Brodsky
published 3.5
2.81
Donna Barrett
published 3
2.80
Margaret Peters
published
Alicia Barnett
published 3
2.66
Ann Yates
published 3
Jennifer Cubitt
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.

Sandra Holahan + Jeanette Kim3262% gamesnot enough data
Donna Barrett + Margaret Peters134 matchesnot enough data
Ann Yates + Margaret Peters314 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.

3.5
Diane Linderman
4W–4L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Jeanette Kim
203W–155L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Dawn MacHonis
5W–9L career · no lines in 2022
21%79%<1%
3.10
3.5
Sandra Holahan
59W–94L career · 3 lines in 2022
22%78%<1%
3.10
3.5
Hilary Brodsky
2W–8L career · no lines in 2022
66%34%<1%
2.95
3
Donna Barrett
8W–10L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%7%
2.81
Margaret Peters
8W–7L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%7%
2.80
3
Alicia Barnett
1W–3L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Ann Yates
6W–10L career · no lines in 2022
11%89%<1%
2.66
Jennifer Cubitt
2W–1L career · no lines in 2022
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.