Teams

Acing Gracefully

2025 55 & Over Fall Women - NA · 7.0 Tuesday Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2025-11-11vs Double VisionLost 12
W#1 DoublesLeah Schlangen / Molly Miller vs Debbie Lowry / Leigh Freeman6-3, 6-2
L#2 DoublesJeanne Philippus / Natalie Douglas vs Kathleen Johnson / Gail Saathoff4-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMaria Elizabeth Lozano / Tracy Rossina vs Mary Whittington / Christine Schenk4-6, 6-2, 0-1
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 7.0 Tuesday 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 3.04 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.

3.45
Leah Schlangen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.35
Maria Elizabeth Lozano
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.31
Natalie Douglas
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.29
Julie Plunkett
published
3.12
Christy Lloyd
published 3.5
3.10
Jeanne Philippus
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.06
Laurie Garbett
published
2.92
Kim Pataky
published
2.85
Evita Castro
published
2.76
Tamara Tilson
published
2.67
Mia Keeter
published
2.64
JENE MILLER
published
Tracy Rossina
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Laurie Garbett + Christy Lloyd2444% games+3.6% vs expected
Jeanne Philippus + Evita Castro5353% games−3.0% vs expected
Natalie Douglas + Julie Plunkett224 matchesnot enough data
Evita Castro + Laurie Garbett044 matchesnot enough data
Laurie Garbett + Tamara Tilson314 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.

Leah Schlangen
28W–19L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%64%36%
3.45
Maria Elizabeth Lozano
15W–24L career · 1 line in 2026
1%85%14%
3.35
Natalie Douglas
11W–11L career · 1 line in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
Julie Plunkett
6W–7L career · no lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.29
3.5
Christy Lloyd
3W–10L career · no lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
3.12
Jeanne Philippus
40W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%25%75%
3.10
Laurie Garbett
35W–21L career · no lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
3.06
Kim Pataky
0W–9L career · no lines in 2026
<1%72%27%
2.92
Evita Castro
26W–35L career · no lines in 2026
1%85%14%
2.85
Tamara Tilson
9W–32L career · no lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.76
Mia Keeter
3W–7L career · no lines in 2026
12%87%1%
2.67
JENE MILLER
6W–10L career · no lines in 2026
16%83%<1%
2.64
Tracy Rossina
0W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data

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.