Teams

A55 8.0W Team #2

CIN Jeffersonville Adult 55 & Over · CIN Jeffersonville A55 8.0W

7 players · average NTRP 3.50 / CENTRAL INDIANA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-07-22vs A55 8.0W Team #1Lost 02
L#1 DoublesHolly Tichenor / Penny DeVenuto vs Cheryl Dortch / Donna Mink0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJulie Sympson / Katy Andrews vs Nancy MacMillan / Tange Skaggs1-6, 0-6
2026-07-21vs A55 8.0W Team #1Lost 03
L#1 DoublesHolly Tichenor / Katy Andrews vs Donna Mink / Beth Blythe2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJulie Sympson / Julie Mann vs Amy Clark / Meg Shonkwiler1-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesKatie Walker / Penny DeVenuto vs Renee Armstrong / Nancy MacMillan1-6, 0-6
2026-07-14vs A55 8.0W Team #1Lost 02
L#1 DoublesJulie Sympson / Katy Andrews vs Nancy MacMillan / Meg Shonkwiler2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesKatie Walker / Holly Tichenor vs Amy Clark / Beth Blythe0-6, 2-6
2026-07-01vs A55 8.0W Team #1Lost 03
L#1 DoublesDeborah Riggs / Angie Anvar vs Pam Williams / Tange Skaggs0-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesPenny DeVenuto / Julie Sympson vs Donna Mink / Renee Armstrong2-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesKatie Walker / Holly Tichenor vs Cheryl Dortch / Betsy Touma2-6, 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 CIN Jeffersonville A55 8.0W 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 3.23 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.

3.31
Julie Sympson
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.29
Angie Anvar
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.21
Julie Mann
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.21
Holly Tichenor
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.20
Deborah Riggs
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.19
Penny DeVenuto
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.19
Katy Andrews
usually #1 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.

Katy Andrews + Angie Anvar134 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.

Julie Sympson
12W–21L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
3.5
Angie Anvar
10W–16L career · 1 line in 2026
2%92%6%
3.29
Julie Mann
9W–9L career · 1 line in 2026
6%92%2%
3.21
Holly Tichenor
12W–26L career · 4 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.21
3.5
Deborah Riggs
7W–9L career · 1 line in 2026
8%91%2%
3.20
Penny DeVenuto
5W–13L career · 3 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.19
Katy Andrews
10W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.19

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.