Teams

WNCL Gilpin (HRC)

Adult 40 & Over USTA WNC 2025 · 40 & O 3.5 Women Tuesday & Friday evening

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

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 →
Schedule2 played
2025-05-21vs WNCD Andrews (ARC S)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesSharlyn Aamodt / Brenda Bowie vs Danielle Andrews / Susan Cook7-5, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMarie Cowan / Donna Remenar vs Holly Renfro / Bethany Smith-Martin2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesSusan Baum / Sheri Sparks vs Kari Hubbard / Stephanie Mason3-6, 1-6
2025-04-08vs WNCD Andrews (ARC S)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesDonna Remenar / Denise Jackson vs Susan Cook / Bethany Smith-Martin5-7, 6-2, 0-1
W#2 DoublesLisa Young / Angie Rardin vs Mindy Nelson / Patti D'Angelo7-5, 7-5
L#3 DoublesSheri Sparks / Julie Wist vs Zsuzsanna Brooks / Holly Renfro2-6, 4-6
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 40 & O 3.5 Women Tuesday & Friday evening 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 3.21 estimated across 10 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.

3.42
Sharlyn Aamodt
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.35
TLynn Gilpin
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.33
Cathy Brinegar
published 3.5
3.32
Amy Eskew
published 3.5
3.31
Angela Hare
published 3.5
3.22
Marie Cowan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.13
Angie Rardin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.11
Brenda Bowie
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.00
Susan Baum
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.89
Sheri Sparks
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Donna Remenar
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Joan Smith
published
Julie Wist
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.

Amy Eskew + Cathy Brinegar10267% games+8.1% vs expected
Angie Rardin + TLynn Gilpin224 matchesnot enough data
Marie Cowan + Brenda Bowie033 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.

Sharlyn Aamodt
19W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%71%29%
3.42
3.5
TLynn Gilpin
286W–221L career · 10 lines in 2025
1%85%14%
3.35
3.5
Cathy Brinegar
29W–16L career · no lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Amy Eskew
29W–12L career · no lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Angela Hare
9W–7L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.31
Marie Cowan
19W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Angie Rardin
15W–29L career · 1 line in 2025
17%82%<1%
3.13
3.5
Brenda Bowie
9W–22L career · 1 line in 2025
22%78%<1%
3.11
Susan Baum
6W–18L career · 1 line in 2025
51%49%<1%
3.00
Sheri Sparks
13W–15L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
2.89
Donna Remenar
0W–3L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Joan Smith
7W–6L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Julie Wist
0W–1L career · 1 line 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.