Teams

Fox-Weeks

2022 Adult 55 & Over- NAZ · NAZ 7.0 Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTHERN ARIZONA

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 →
Schedule4 played
2022-05-15vs CowellLost 02
L#1 DoublesVickie Fox-Weeks / Amy Champ vs Leeanna Sewell / Elizabeth Desy3-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJoanne Conn / Kate Zeiger vs Tracey Tibbs / Mary Joy Perry2-6, 3-6
2022-05-15vs CowellWon 20
W#1 DoublesVickie Fox-Weeks / Kate Zeiger vs Tracey Tibbs / Mary Joy Perry1-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAmy Champ / Joanne Conn vs Belinda Batie / Robyn Henslin6-2, 7-6
2022-05-07vs NAZ/Brown/55&Over/7.0WSplit 11
W#1 DoublesVickie Fox-Weeks / Kelly Steel vs Nita Hiltner / Cynthia Weick6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesJoanne Conn / Amy Champ vs Jean Brown / Donna Roberts3-6, 1-6
2022-05-07vs NAZ/Brown/55&Over/7.0WSplit 11
L#1 DoublesVickie Fox-Weeks / Amy Champ vs Yuriko Smith / Vanessa Scheu6-3, 0-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesJoanne Conn / Kelly Steel vs Donna Roberts / Nita Hiltner6-2, 4-6, 1-0
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 NAZ 7.0 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 3.36 estimated across 2 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.

3.38
Vickie Fox-Weeks
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.33
Kelly Steel
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Amy Champ
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Cindi Mason
published 3.5
Joanne Conn
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kate Zeiger
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Cindi Mason + Vickie Fox-Weeks4256% games+9.2% vs expected
Kelly Steel + Vickie Fox-Weeks31959% games+4.4% vs expected
Cindi Mason + Joanne Conn191052% games−1.6% vs expected
Kelly Steel + Joanne Conn4251% games−12.7% vs expected
Amy Champ + Vickie Fox-Weeks4255% gamesnot enough data
Joanne Conn + Vickie Fox-Weeks134 matchesnot enough data
Kelly Steel + Kate Zeiger213 matchesnot enough data
Amy Champ + Joanne Conn123 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.

Vickie Fox-Weeks
75W–46L career · 4 lines in 2022
82%18%<1%
3.38
Kelly Steel
46W–19L career · 2 lines in 2022
90%10%<1%
3.33
3.5
Amy Champ
19W–26L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Cindi Mason
39W–23L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Joanne Conn
32W–41L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Kate Zeiger
9W–9L career · 2 lines in 2022
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.