Teams

CAckels (PCC)

2026 Combo Doubles 40 & Over League · 40 & Over Combo 6.5 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.17 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-09-04vs ATrexler/LPelletier (Queens)Won 21
L#1 DoublesLisa Long / Laura Richards vs Kate Kirschner / Gretchen Andrews4-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesCarla Ackels / Karen Claffey vs Allie Trexler / Lauren Pelletier7-5, 6-0
W#3 DoublesKimberly French / Michele Messmer vs Christina Volpe / Nicole Smith7-5, 6-0
2026-08-23vs KOShea/RFitzsimons (Carmel)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesKaren Claffey / Lisa Sciortino vs Carole Ann Araiza / Sandy Dellinger3-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesCarla Ackels / Lisa Long vs Beth Hahn / Kara Olsen2-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesKim Garner / Kimberly French vs Rebecca Fitzsimons / Carrie Kramer6-7, 1-6
2026-08-21vs ACutts (WSRC)Won 21
W#1 DoublesLisa Long / Laura Richards vs Brandi Hoover / Jacqui Gentile6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesKimberly French / Elizabeth Suppa vs Heather Taylor / Nanette Murphy6-2, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLinda Williams / Ashley Sofsian vs Tracy Lacroix / Kelli Massaro6-4, 5-7, 0-1
2026-08-07vs JHerlong/LOCallaghan (FCC)Won 21
W#1 DoublesKaren Claffey / Michele Messmer vs Danielle Shealy / Tammy Ward6-3, 7-6
L#2 DoublesKimberly French / Carla Ackels vs Johanne Bulger / Janine Geada6-7, 3-6
W#3 DoublesJulia Murphy / Kim Garner vs Dorie de Armas / Kelly Coleman6-2, 6-2
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 standings44 teams · 40 & Over Combo 6.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SAliota/CBauer (Carmel)2060243
2VWade/KCollins (Jeff Adams)2051229
3SStroud/MMetzl (Sardis)2051224
4LDyer (Mountainbrook)2042548
5JWoodruff (CSRC)2042555
6LPratt/CPrejean (Lifetime)1030012
7MMcHugh (Queens)1030012
8KCronin/LFerguson (Piper Glen)1030113
9SGrindle (WSRC)1021217
10CAckels (PCC)1021226
11KRichards (Raintree)1021220
12SNewman (BCC)1021218
13BDunn (PPRSC)1021217
14JJZhu (Park Road)1021326
15KOShea/RFitzsimons (Carmel)1021326
16EBass/LThompson (Sardis)1021323
17LDiman/Magee (Carmel)1021322
18JCarlsen (River Hills Country Club)1021427
19JHerlong/LOCallaghan (FCC)1142446
20KCox (MPCC)1142555
21SChandra (Charlotte Tennis - Sharon Lakes)1142547
22LHuntington (Park Road)1133648
23AMilas (OPRC)1133751
24KGreathouse (Russell)1124863
25BBrown (Park Crossing)1124857
26VTolson/Petras (FCC)000000
27CChilds (Blakeney)000000
28SNester/SHarris (Windyrush)000000
29AHall (Raintree)0112428
30SDurovic/Wilson (Palisades)0112430
31LAndersen/SGossert (Shannamara)0112428
32TMermans/JPetrikis (WSRC)0112425
33JFontaine/Inga (Life Time)0112535
34MTurturro (OPRC)0112537
35ACutts (WSRC)0112528
36CMcKiernan (Raintree)0103638
37THyso (Life Time)0103634
38VBorkey (Pine Lake CC)0103636
39ACheek/KBissett (Piper Glen)0103632
40VPomfrey (Rolling Hills)0224961
41DPorter/Fuller (Carmel)02151068
42CMiller (Charlotte CC)02151067
43ATrexler/LPelletier (Queens)02151072
44ASmith (OPRC)02151065

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 2.92 estimated across 9 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.

3.33
Karen Claffey
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.23
Ashley Sofsian
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.02
Carla Ackels
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.91
Lisa Sciortino
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.91
Michele Messmer
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.84
Laura Richards
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.78
Kim Garner
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.69
Elizabeth Suppa
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.57
Julia Murphy
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.

Carla Ackels + Laura Richards4448% games−1.9% vs expected
Lisa Sciortino + Ashley Sofsian8260% gamesnot enough data
Kim Garner + Carla Ackels4159% gamesnot enough data
Lisa Sciortino + Karen Claffey2345% gamesnot enough data
Ashley Sofsian + Carla Ackels4155% gamesnot enough data
Karen Claffey + Carla Ackels224 matchesnot enough data
Michele Messmer + Karen Claffey123 matchesnot enough data
Michele Messmer + Carla Ackels033 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
Karen Claffey
101W–57L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Ashley Sofsian
109W–75L career · 3 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.23
3
Carla Ackels
94W–97L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%43%57%
3.02
3
Lisa Sciortino
44W–29L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%73%27%
2.91
3
Michele Messmer
30W–28L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
2.91
Laura Richards
12W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%1%99%
2.84
3
Kim Garner
43W–50L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
2.78
Elizabeth Suppa
4W–9L career · 1 line in 2026
8%90%1%
2.69
Julia Murphy
5W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
0%30%70%
2.57

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.