Teams

Fettes: Minnesota Slice Girls

2025 ADULT 55 & OVER SUMMER · 6.0 WOMEN

12 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTHERN

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 →
Schedule1 played
2025-06-09vs Northern/Hoffer/55&Over6.0WWon 21
W#1 DoublesEileen Stanley / Julie Weaver vs Stephani Lind / Maureen Wollak6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesMarsha Andrusko / Leah Lewis vs Anne Crepps / Christina Dawson1-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesBrenda Jewell / Kathleen Miller vs Susan Dammen / Julie Hoffer4-6, 6-3, 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 6.0 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 2.78 estimated across 8 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.

2.99
Eileen Stanley
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.96
Judy Haeg
published
2.80
Ann Hackett
published 3
2.77
Brenda Jewell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.77
Kathleen Miller
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.75
Mary Pouliot
published
2.66
Patricia Fettes
published
2.54
Deb Holmgren
published 3
Laura Sheak
published
Leah Lewis
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Marsha Andrusko
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Michelle Ruffing
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · 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.

Patricia Fettes + Deb Holmgren1447% games+2.9% vs expected
Patricia Fettes + Kathleen Miller134 matchesnot enough data
Brenda Jewell + Kathleen Miller303 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.

Eileen Stanley
22W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%54%46%
2.99
Judy Haeg
23W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%60%40%
2.96
3
Ann Hackett
14W–10L career · no lines in 2025
2%91%8%
2.80
3
Brenda Jewell
9W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
Kathleen Miller
15W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
Mary Pouliot
4W–5L career · no lines in 2025
4%93%4%
2.75
Patricia Fettes
11W–14L career · no lines in 2025
13%87%1%
2.66
3
Deb Holmgren
7W–9L career · no lines in 2025
38%62%<1%
2.54
Laura Sheak
5W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Leah Lewis
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Marsha Andrusko
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Michelle Ruffing
70W–98L career · 5 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.