Teams

Em.Kendall40S

2026 Capital Singles 40 & Over · 3.5 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.42 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-07-12vs Er.Wynia40SLost 02
L#2 SinglesKristen Wassel vs Dianna Erwin3-6, 3-6
L#3 SinglesLaura Panebianco vs Gillian Kelleher4-6, 3-5
2026-07-05vs Er.Wynia40SLost 03
L#1 SinglesKristen Wassel vs Sonet Weber1-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesLaura Panebianco vs Julie Dougherty1-6, 3-6
L#3 SinglesCarolyn Roach vs Amy Hobbs4-6, 5-7
2026-06-28vs Er.Wynia40SLost 02
L#2 SinglesLaura Panebianco vs Shannon Littleton2-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesAnn Willard vs Amy Hobbs0-6, 4-6
2026-06-17vs Er.Wynia40SSplit 11
L#1 SinglesMary Jo Nugent vs Sonet Weber1-6, 2-6
W#3 SinglesAshley McCollum vs Gillian Kelleher6-3, 6-4
2026-06-07vs Er.Wynia40SWon 21
W#1 SinglesMary Jo Nugent vs Dianna Erwin6-4, 7-6
W#2 SinglesShannon Beach vs Erin Wynia3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 SinglesAnn Willard vs Julie Dougherty5-7, 0-6
2026-05-24vs Er.Wynia40SSplit 11
L#1 SinglesCarolyn Roach vs Sonet Weber1-6, 0-6
W#2 SinglesShannon Beach vs Shannon Littleton6-3, 5-7, 1-0
2026-05-17vs Er.Wynia40SLost 02
L#1 SinglesAshley McCollum vs Sonet Weber0-6, 0-6
L#3 SinglesLaura Panebianco vs Amy Hobbs6-7, 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 standings2 teams · 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Er.Wynia40S611749122
2Em.Kendall40S1641736240

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 3.33 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.

3.52
Ashley McCollum
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.52
Shannon Beach
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.42
Mary Jo Nugent
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.37
Kristen Wassel
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.33
Carolyn Roach
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.20
Ann Willard
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3.5
2.98
Laura Panebianco
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
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.

Laura Panebianco + Shannon Beach5261% gamesnot enough data
Kristen Wassel + Shannon Beach213 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
Ashley McCollum
26W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%44%56%
3.52
3.5
Shannon Beach
97W–35L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%44%56%
3.52
Mary Jo Nugent
42W–22L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
3.42
3.5
Kristen Wassel
129W–83L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%85%15%
3.37
3.5
Carolyn Roach
13W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%10%
3.33
3.5
Ann Willard
11W–22L career · 2 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
3.20
3
Laura Panebianco
100W–119L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%57%43%
2.98

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.