Teams

Highgrove - McEldoon

2025 SCTA Winter '24 · '25 - USTA Adult 40 & Over Women

18 players · average NTRP 3.10 / GEORGIA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-04-30Won 10
W#3 DoublesDeborah Baus / Lindsay Hepler vs Rebecca Humbert / Alexandra Mundo6-3, 6-2
2025-04-23Lost 01
L#1 DoublesDeborah Baus / Denise Hofrichter vs Kimberly Funte / Angela Goodwin2-6, 3-6
2025-04-16vs Summergrove - Lunsford/DooleWon 10
W#2 DoublesDeborah Baus / Pamela Saylor vs Debbie Lunsford / Jeannie Doole1-6, 6-0, 6-3
2025-04-09vs Highgrove - Groft/TurnerLost 01
L#3 DoublesDeborah Baus / Jacqueline Wheeler vs Daniela Hofman-Diliberto / Kathy Turner2-6, 6-1, 4-6
2025-04-02Lost 01
L#2 DoublesDeborah Baus / Carol Corrigan vs Beth Ellis / Amanda Page5-7, 2-6
2025-03-19Lost 01
L#2 DoublesDeborah Baus / Jennifer Hatfield vs Stacy Killmon / Lesli O'Neill6-3, 2-6, 3-6
2025-03-12Lost 01
L#1 DoublesDeborah Baus / Jessica Weeks vs Tori Yearta / Lauren Terranova2-6, 2-6
2025-03-07Lost 01
L#2 DoublesDeborah Baus / Jennifer Hatfield vs Jennifer Staples / Sylvia Guice6-7, 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 standings for '25 - USTA Adult 40 & Over 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 2.94 estimated across 17 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.

3.56
Brooke Moore
usually #1 Doubles 91%, also #2 Doubles 9% · published 3.5
3.47
Stacee Mceldoon
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.27
Lindsay Hepler
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #2 Doubles 36% · published
3.22
Deborah Baus
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.97
Pamela Saylor
usually #4 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 22% · published
2.94
Dana Lezaj
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.90
Victoria Wyatt
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 19% · published
2.87
Gladys Walker
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.84
Carol Corrigan
usually #2 Doubles 25%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.83
Renee Awtry
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 42% · published
2.82
Denise Hofrichter
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.79
Amie Craddock
usually #3 Doubles 32%, also #1 Doubles 26% · published 3
2.78
Cathy Chordegian
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.76
Kristin Hancock
usually #4 Doubles 55%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published
2.76
Jacqueline Wheeler
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published 3
2.65
Jennifer Vannier
usually #4 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 46% · published
2.57
Buffie Davenport
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 21% · published 3
Jessica Weeks
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · 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.

Buffie Davenport + Gladys Walker201152% games+3.3% vs expected
Kristin Hancock + Amie Craddock0539% games−0.9% vs expected
Victoria Wyatt + Denise Hofrichter044 matchesnot enough data
Victoria Wyatt + Gladys Walker044 matchesnot enough data
Jacqueline Wheeler + Kristin Hancock404 matchesnot enough data
Renee Awtry + Cathy Chordegian134 matchesnot enough data
Pamela Saylor + Kristin Hancock314 matchesnot enough data
Lindsay Hepler + Amie Craddock224 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
Brooke Moore
46W–35L career · 11 lines in 2025
<1%33%67%
3.56
Stacee Mceldoon
42W–21L career · 9 lines in 2025
<1%60%40%
3.47
Lindsay Hepler
17W–15L career · 11 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Deborah Baus
14W–23L career · 8 lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.22
Pamela Saylor
13W–14L career · 9 lines in 2025
59%41%<1%
2.97
3
Dana Lezaj
17W–18L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%69%31%
2.94
Victoria Wyatt
39W–68L career · 15 lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
2.90
3
Gladys Walker
35W–27L career · 20 lines in 2025
<1%84%15%
2.87
3
Carol Corrigan
28W–30L career · 12 lines in 2025
<1%88%12%
2.84
Renee Awtry
17W–29L career · 12 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
2.83
3
Denise Hofrichter
25W–39L career · 6 lines in 2025
1%91%8%
2.82
3
Amie Craddock
29W–48L career · 19 lines in 2025
1%94%5%
2.79
3
Cathy Chordegian
17W–21L career · 15 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
2.78
Kristin Hancock
14W–33L career · 11 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
2.76
3
Jacqueline Wheeler
14W–15L career · 10 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
2.76
Jennifer Vannier
18W–45L career · 11 lines in 2025
12%88%<1%
2.65
3
Buffie Davenport
31W–46L career · 14 lines in 2025
30%70%<1%
2.57
Jessica Weeks
8W–4L career · 4 lines in 2025
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.