Teams

SD 7.0 Coronado TC/ Holzer

2026 Adult 55 & Over Spring · Summer- SD

12 players · average NTRP 3.40 / SAN DIEGO

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2026-06-11vs SD 7.0 Lake Murray TC/ SnyderWon 10
W#2 DoublesKarin Copp / Diana Kirkland vs Lynne Carry / Lisa Lee6-2
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 standings5 teams · Summer- SD
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SD LLW WD 7.0 Mountain View/ Roberts8224619208
2SD 7.0 Coronado TC/ Holzer73181228265
3SD 7.0 Mountain View/ Padilla55131740302
4SD 7.0 SDTRC/ Peinado1972348332
5SD 7.0 Lake Murray TC/ Snyder1962450340

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 3.11 estimated across 12 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.

3.64
Diana Kirkland
published 4
3.42
Susie Alvarez
published 4
3.37
Elizabeth Dahlgren
published 3.5
3.32
Caroline Mickel
published 3.5
3.25
Diana Elia
published 3.5
3.15
Sue Taylor
published
3.10
Caree Lesh
published 3.5
2.94
Karin Copp
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.94
Sheryl Putnam
published 3
2.87
Leslie Vineyard
published 3
2.82
Amy Holzer
published 3
2.46
Heidi Nevitt
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.

Caree Lesh + Elizabeth Dahlgren9453% games−0.4% vs expected
Amy Holzer + Karin Copp3251% games−1.8% vs expected
Leslie Vineyard + Karin Copp0537% games−4.1% vs expected
Diana Elia + Elizabeth Dahlgren3253% gamesnot enough data
Susie Alvarez + Amy Holzer1439% gamesnot enough data
Sue Taylor + Diana Kirkland1439% gamesnot enough data
Caroline Mickel + Amy Holzer224 matchesnot enough data
Sue Taylor + Caroline Mickel123 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
Diana Kirkland
47W–102L career · no lines in 2026
16%84%1%
3.64
4
Susie Alvarez
84W–81L career · no lines in 2026
73%27%<1%
3.42
3.5
Elizabeth Dahlgren
85W–80L career · no lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.37
3.5
Caroline Mickel
65W–61L career · no lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Diana Elia
58W–53L career · no lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.25
Sue Taylor
55W–58L career · no lines in 2026
15%85%1%
3.15
3.5
Caree Lesh
29W–42L career · no lines in 2026
24%75%<1%
3.10
Karin Copp
11W–14L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%66%34%
2.94
3
Sheryl Putnam
56W–67L career · no lines in 2026
<1%67%33%
2.94
3
Leslie Vineyard
30W–51L career · no lines in 2026
<1%82%17%
2.87
3
Amy Holzer
80W–104L career · no lines in 2026
1%89%10%
2.82
3
Heidi Nevitt
7W–11L career · type S · no lines in 2026
60%40%<1%
2.46

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.