← Teams

WHRC-Leng

2019 Adult 40 & Over · 3.5 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.25 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 2.98 estimated across 6 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.

—
Maryam Farinola
usually #1 Singles 83%, also #2 Singles 17% · published 3.5
3.17
Paula Watt
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.11
Pat Kaplan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.98
Toni Lipke
usually #1 Doubles 25%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3
2.93
Cathy Zagunis
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.92
Suzanne Friedman
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.79
Eunhee Heller
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
—
Judy Potts
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3
Results9 ties
2019-06-21Lost 0–4
L#1 DoublesPat Kaplan / Cathy Zagunis vs Stephanie Jones / Louanne Fuller6-2, 6-3
L#1 SinglesMaryam Farinola vs Carrie Willis6-2, 7-6
L#2 DoublesJudy Potts / Caryn Cohen vs Trylla Lembke / Lorna Goth6-3, 6-2
L#3 DoublesToni Eastwood / Eunhee Heller vs Kim Hamlik / JULIE ANDREWS6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2019-06-14Lost 0–1
L#3 DoublesAlan Potts / Judy Potts vs Donna Klindt / Douglas Walker6-2, 6-0
2019-06-14Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesPat Kaplan / Laura Greenberg vs Kirsten Holmes / Christy Strange6-3, 6-0
L#2 DoublesSusan Eldridge / Toni Eastwood vs Leah Buxman / Sara van Beckum6-1, 6-3
L#3 DoublesMichelle Cole / Suzanne Friedman vs Kristen Kopack / Elizabeth Schwarz6-3, 6-2
2019-06-08Lost 0–2
L#1 SinglesMaryam Farinola vs Pam Saftler6-0, 6-3
L#3 DoublesJudy Potts / Emily Cohen vs Kim Wright / Kristin Eckelman6-3, 6-1
2019-06-02Won 3–1
W#1 DoublesLaura Greenberg / Cathy Zagunis vs Julie Job / Sue Piazza6-0, 7-5
W#1 SinglesMaryam Farinola vs Stephnie Bonn6-3, 7-5
L#2 DoublesSusan Eldridge / Eunhee Heller vs Shari Carver / Karen Mott6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMichelle Cole / Suzanne Friedman vs Colleen Golden / Linda Degnan6-2, 6-2
2019-05-19Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesPat Kaplan / Cathy Zagunis vs Barbara Hart / Amy Marks6-1, 5-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesMaryam Farinola vs Amie Manske6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesEunhee Heller / Laura Greenberg vs Marianne Conroy / Kimberly Seely6-0, 6-2
2019-05-17Lost 0–4
L#1 DoublesCaryn Cohen / Suzanne Friedman vs Sara van Beckum / Sarah Yu6-1, 6-1
L#1 SinglesMaryam Farinola vs Kirsten Holmes6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesJudy Potts / Emily Cohen vs Fiona Tait / Kristen Kopack6-3, 6-0
L#3 DoublesLaura Greenberg / Eunhee Heller vs Elizabeth Schwarz / Gabriela McIntosh6-4, 7-6
2019-05-05Lost 0–4
L#1 DoublesPat Kaplan / Paula Watt vs Kristie Leake / Anne Brandenburger6-1, 6-2
L#2 DoublesJudy Potts / Emily Cohen vs Bin He / Aleli Siruno6-3, 6-0
L#2 SinglesToni Eastwood vs Dolores Corley6-4, 6-4
L#3 DoublesCathy Zagunis / Tamara Beecroft vs Robin Fernstrom / Julie Legassick6-2, 6-2
2019-04-20Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesToni Eastwood / Susan Eldridge vs Trylla Lembke / Denise Dawkins6-2, 7-5
L#2 SinglesMaryam Farinola vs Heather Watkins6-3, 6-3
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.
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.

3.5
Maryam Farinola
55W–59L career
not enough data
—
3.5
Paula Watt
43W–47L career
15%82%2%
3.17
3.5
Pat Kaplan
25W–50L career · type A
18%81%0%
3.11
3
Toni Lipke
44W–74L career
0%86%14%
2.98
3.5
Cathy Zagunis
45W–66L career
55%45%0%
2.93
3
Suzanne Friedman
25W–28L career
0%88%12%
2.92
3
Eunhee Heller
13W–12L career
2%95%3%
2.79
3
Judy Potts
10W–36L career
not enough data
—

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.