Teams

UMLY 55

Adult 55 & Over · 8.0 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.85 / PHILADELPHIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-08-11vs Lemon LoveLost 03
L#1 DoublesJaclyn Baver / Sharon Spaeder vs Lisa Kitchen / Sandra Marcus2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJune Teufel / Cindy MacKay vs Nancy Denig / Jodi Knapp1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesNancy Landau / Elizabeth Rejonis vs Deborah Cutrona / Kris Scoffone4-6, 2-6
2026-08-04vs Lucky PenniesLost 03
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Rejonis / June Teufel vs Peggy O'Dwyer / Kelly Flannery2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesCarol Leslie / Noelle Lachenmayer vs Tammy Harris / Linda Hasz1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesKaren Krane / Nancy Landau vs Barbara Burdick / Christine Walter2-6, 0-6
2026-07-28vs Fantastic Girls 55+Lost 03
L#1 DoublesKaren Krane / Alicia Sikes vs Elizabeth Cohen / Megan Reddish6-7, 5-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJaclyn Baver / Noelle Lachenmayer vs Min Foga / Ming Chen Pu3-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesElizabeth Rejonis / Susan Stickley vs Sherry Chen / Yun Ying2-6, 6-2, 0-1
2026-07-21vs Slicing ShotsLost 12
L#1 DoublesKathleen Glikes / Sharon Spaeder vs Nan Barash / Tatyana Kansburg4-6, 1-5
L#2 DoublesCarol Leslie / Jaclyn Baver vs Debra Lorah / Angela Pidutti3-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesJune Teufel / Cindy MacKay vs Christine Walker / Suzanne Leiser7-6, 2-1
2026-07-15vs Locked and LoadedWon 21
W#1 DoublesSharon Spaeder / Carol Leslie vs Lesley Nicolson / Maureen Patane6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Rejonis / June Teufel vs Krista McGrath / Megan Reardon3-6, 6-7
W#3 DoublesAlicia Sikes / Karen Krane vs Bonnie Shapiro / Joyce Shiau6-1, 7-5
2026-06-30vs Rock Paper ScissorsLost 03
L#1 DoublesJaclyn Baver / Noelle Lachenmayer vs Kristine OMalley / Trevor Saunders1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesToni Hamlett / Elizabeth Rejonis vs Susan Hughes / Diane Maund1-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesNancy Landau / Cindy MacKay vs Rae Fairfield / Lisa Lyons1-6, 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 standings7 teams · 8.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Lemon Love0611717136
2Lucky Pennies0611719150
3Fantastic Girls 55+0610820162
4Rock Paper Scissors069920151
5Locked and Loaded069920164
6Slicing Shots0610821168
7UMLY 550631531200

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 3.42 estimated across 13 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.

3.59
Alicia Sikes
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.58
Toni Hamlett
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.56
Elizabeth Rejonis
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.53
Jaclyn Baver
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.50
Cindy MacKay
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.48
Carol Leslie
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.44
Kathleen Glikes
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.44
Noelle Lachenmayer
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.43
Sharon Spaeder
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.38
Nancy Landau
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.28
Karen Krane
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.14
June Teufel
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.06
Susan Stickley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Kathleen Glikes + Sharon Spaeder3640% games+4.7% vs expected
Jaclyn Baver + Elizabeth Rejonis81250% games+1.7% vs expected
Jaclyn Baver + Carol Leslie3548% games+1.1% vs expected
June Teufel + Karen Krane1741% games−2.0% vs expected
Jaclyn Baver + Karen Krane3544% games−2.8% vs expected
Sharon Spaeder + Cindy MacKay2338% games−4.8% vs expected
Susan Stickley + Elizabeth Rejonis183044% games−4.8% vs expected
June Teufel + Sharon Spaeder2539% games−5.9% vs expected
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
Alicia Sikes
113W–105L career · 2 lines in 2026
26%74%<1%
3.59
4
Toni Hamlett
160W–246L career · 1 line in 2026
27%72%<1%
3.58
4
Elizabeth Rejonis
104W–115L career · 10 lines in 2026
32%68%<1%
3.56
4
Jaclyn Baver
60W–91L career · 4 lines in 2026
41%59%<1%
3.53
4
Cindy MacKay
17W–34L career · 3 lines in 2026
51%49%<1%
3.50
4
Carol Leslie
162W–201L career · 3 lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
3.48
4
Kathleen Glikes
97W–153L career · 1 line in 2026
66%34%<1%
3.44
4
Noelle Lachenmayer
76W–73L career · 3 lines in 2026
68%32%<1%
3.44
4
Sharon Spaeder
94W–104L career · 3 lines in 2026
69%31%<1%
3.43
3.5
Nancy Landau
66W–70L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.38
3.5
Karen Krane
104W–154L career · 8 lines in 2026
2%92%5%
3.28
3.5
June Teufel
14W–49L career · 4 lines in 2026
16%84%1%
3.14
3.5
Susan Stickley
30W–48L career · 1 line in 2026
33%67%<1%
3.06

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.