Teams

Ray/HCP/Foothills

2022 Foothills Spring 55 & Over League · Women 4.0 - Sunday afternoon

6 players · average NTRP 3.80 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-05-01vs Murphy/DV/FoothillsWon 20
W#1 DoublesSusan Ottofaro Ray / Lynne Place vs Sarah Murphy / Valerie Craig6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesBrenda Isenhour / Connie Kleeves vs Dru Henson / Linda Robinson3-0
2022-04-24vs Murphy/DV/FoothillsLost 12
L#1 DoublesElaine Myers / Lynne Place vs Lindsey Linker / Kimberly Church4-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesSuzanne Davis / Susan Ottofaro Ray vs Carolina Carney / Valerie Craig3-6, 6-7
W#3 DoublesBrenda Isenhour / Connie Kleeves vs Dru Henson / Linda Robinson1-0
2022-04-10vs Murphy/DV/FoothillsLost 01
L#1 DoublesConnie Kleeves / Lynne Place vs Lindsey Linker / Kimberly Church4-6, 1-6
2022-04-03vs Murphy/DV/FoothillsLost 01
L#1 DoublesLynne Place / Connie Kleeves vs Sarah Murphy / Lindsey Linker3-6, 2-6
2022-03-27vs Murphy/DV/FoothillsLost 02
L#1 DoublesSusan Ottofaro Ray / Suzanne Davis vs Sarah Murphy / Mary Sheryl Horine3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesLynne Place / Connie Kleeves vs Valerie Craig / Kimberly Church2-6, 5-7
2022-03-20vs Murphy/DV/FoothillsLost 01
L#3 DoublesMarian Erikson / Lynne Place vs Lindsey Linker / Kimberly Church1-6, 2-6
2022-03-06vs Murphy/DV/FoothillsLost 03
L#1 DoublesConnie Kleeves / Michele Mcbride vs Lindsey Linker / Mary Sheryl Horine3-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesRosa Szalanski / Lynne Place vs Sarah Murphy / Carolina Carney1-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesSusan Ottofaro Ray / Suzanne Davis vs Carol Almond / Kathleen Graham4-6, 5-7
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 4.0 - Sunday afternoon 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 3.44 estimated across 6 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.

3.80
Connie Kleeves
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.58
Susan Ottofaro Ray
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.52
Lynne Place
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.28
Elaine Myers
published 3.5
3.27
Betty Mahoney
published 3.5
3.21
Rosa Szalanski
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.

Susan Ottofaro Ray + Connie Kleeves5742% games−3.7% vs expected
Susan Ottofaro Ray + Lynne Place5647% gamesnot enough data
Lynne Place + Connie Kleeves4348% gamesnot 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
Connie Kleeves
46W–50L career · 6 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.80
4
Susan Ottofaro Ray
86W–103L career · 4 lines in 2022
26%74%<1%
3.58
4
Lynne Place
149W–164L career · 7 lines in 2022
44%56%<1%
3.52
3.5
Elaine Myers
6W–3L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Betty Mahoney
5W–9L career · type A · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.27
Rosa Szalanski
4W–3L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.21

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.