Teams

An.Pfeiffer55C

2025 Capital Combo 55 & Over · 7.5 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.75 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-10-06vs De.Collins55CWon 20
W#2 DoublesDana Weiland / Andrea Pfeiffer vs Brenda Kullick / Michell Wilson6-1, 7-6
W#3 DoublesLeigh Kimball / Stephanie Rabby vs Kathy Casadonte / Alice Snell6-3, 6-2
2025-09-22vs Jo.Taylor55CSplit 11
L#1 DoublesKathleen Tsibulsky / Lisa Scott vs Carol Lekan / Wendy Burkard6-7, 4-6
W#3 DoublesDana Weiland / Andrea Pfeiffer vs Elizabeth Hensley / Mary Cockrill6-2, 6-4
2025-09-08vs Jo.Lake55CWon 10
W#1 DoublesLisa Scott / Kathleen Tsibulsky vs Tracey Carlin / Joyce Lake6-2, 7-6
2025-08-18vs Ca.Conzola55C7.5Lost 01
L#2 DoublesJulie Fleming / Leigh Kimball vs Marina Barthalmus / Jane Hunter1-6, 2-6
2025-08-11vs De.Collins55CSplit 11
W#1 DoublesLeigh Kimball / Julie Fleming vs Judith Gallagher / Julie Sauls6-3, 6-2
L#2 DoublesJeanmarie Warren / Kathleen Tsibulsky vs Jennifer Van Ness / Michell Wilson6-7, 4-6
2025-08-04vs Ta.LeFevre55C7.5Lost 01
L#1 DoublesAndrea Pfeiffer / Dana Weiland vs Susan Fanelly / Deb Lanier1-6, 2-6
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 7.5 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 3.39 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.

3.99
Dana Weiland
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.52
3.52
Leigh Kimball
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.46
Kathryn Beth Beam
published
3.36
Stephanie Rabby
published
3.28
Nancy Baird
published
3.05
Kathleen Tsibulsky
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published 3.5
2.94
Andrea Pfeiffer
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
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.

Andrea Pfeiffer + Dana Weiland101046% games−11.0% vs expected
Leigh Kimball + Dana Weiland2647% gamesnot enough data
Kathleen Tsibulsky + Andrea Pfeiffer2534% gamesnot enough data
Andrea Pfeiffer + Leigh Kimball314 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
Dana Weiland
170W–126L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%53%47%
3.99
Monica Shea-Henderson
1W–2L career · no lines in 2025
45%55%<1%
3.52
4
Leigh Kimball
57W–73L career · 3 lines in 2025
46%54%<1%
3.52
Kathryn Beth Beam
4W–14L career · no lines in 2025
62%38%<1%
3.46
Stephanie Rabby
2W–2L career · no lines in 2025
85%15%<1%
3.36
Nancy Baird
6W–3L career · no lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.28
3.5
Kathleen Tsibulsky
52W–118L career · 8 lines in 2025
35%65%<1%
3.05
3.5
Andrea Pfeiffer
73W–145L career · 3 lines in 2025
67%33%<1%
2.94

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.