Teams

WI Adult 55&O 7.0W MALT Neukirch

2026 WI Adult 55 & Over · WI Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.67 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-02-07vs WI Adult 55&O 7.0W MALT RieschLost 03
L#1 DoublesCandice DeJarlais / Jiwon Paik vs Lisa Kreuser / Kathleen Sherman6-3, 6-7, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJoy Gander / Jane Kufel vs Lisa Hempstead / Margie Moeller7-5, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesKathleen Oconnell / Lisa Walters vs Andrea Anderson / Ann Camillo3-6, 4-6
2026-01-31vs WI Adult 55&O 7.0W MALT RieschLost 03
L#1 DoublesJoy Gander / Lisa Walters vs Foluke Otitoju / Kathleen Sherman2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesKathleen Oconnell / Maryjo Grimm vs Donna Neuber / Lisa Kreuser4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesDiane Neukirch / Kerry Berens vs Andrea Anderson / Paula Riesch1-6, 5-7
2026-01-24vs WI Adult 55&O 7.0W MALT RieschSplit 11
L#2 DoublesSusan Harkness-Shifflett / Kathleen Oconnell vs Paula Riesch / Andrea Anderson2-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesCandice DeJarlais / Julie Kaiser vs Kathleen Sherman / Ann Camillo6-2, 6-2
2026-01-17vs WI Adult 55&O 7.0W MALT RieschLost 12
L#1 DoublesCandice DeJarlais / Julie Kaiser vs Lisa Kreuser / Donna Neuber1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesSusan Harkness-Shifflett / Kerry Berens vs Foluke Otitoju / Joann Martin4-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesJane Kufel / Maryjo Grimm vs Margie Moeller / Andrea Anderson6-2, 7-5
2026-01-10vs WI Adult 55&O 7.0W MALT RieschLost 12
L#1 DoublesJiwon Paik / Julie Kaiser vs Lisa Hempstead / Donna Neuber6-7, 3-6
L#2 DoublesKathleen Oconnell / Susan Harkness-Shifflett vs Ann Camillo / Foluke Otitoju5-7, 7-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesMaryjo Grimm / Jane Kufel vs Margie Moeller / Joann Martin6-4, 6-3
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 standings2 teams · WI Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Adult 55&O 7.0W MALT Riesch4111412134
2WI Adult 55&O 7.0W MALT Neukirch1441122153

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 3.17 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.

Diane Neukirch
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.49
Joy Gander
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.42
Candice DeJarlais
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.19
Jiwon Paik
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.19
Susan Harkness-Shifflett
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.06
Kathleen Oconnell
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.01
Jane Kufel
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.81
Kerry Berens
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Lisa Walters
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Maryjo Grimm
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Kathleen Oconnell + Jiwon Paik4260% games+12.2% vs expected
Susan Harkness-Shifflett + Kathleen Oconnell162648% games−0.1% vs expected
Diane Neukirch + Candice DeJarlais3252% gamesnot enough data
Candice DeJarlais + Kerry Berens2352% gamesnot enough data
Joy Gander + Susan Harkness-Shifflett134 matchesnot enough data
Diane Neukirch + Kerry Berens123 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
Diane Neukirch
178W–89L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Joy Gander
115W–94L career · 2 lines in 2026
52%48%<1%
3.49
3.5
Candice DeJarlais
219W–148L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
3.42
3.5
Jiwon Paik
128W–128L career · 8 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
3.19
Susan Harkness-Shifflett
136W–139L career · 3 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
3.19
Kathleen Oconnell
97W–115L career · 4 lines in 2026
32%68%<1%
3.06
Jane Kufel
53W–45L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%47%53%
3.01
Kerry Berens
88W–108L career · 2 lines in 2026
93%7%<1%
2.81
Lisa Walters
9W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Maryjo Grimm
44W–23L career · 3 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.