Teams

EDG-55+ and Fabulous Ladies-Pine

2021 Adult 55 & Over · 6.0 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.06 / NORTHWEST WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2020-11-07vs TCSP-55% StuartLost 02
L#1 DoublesMary Adkins / Caprice Pine vs Telsin Brower / DeeDee Schubert6-7, 1-6
L#2 DoublesBrenda Schlemlein / Laura Rochford vs LLora Zichittella / Bridget Charters6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2020-11-01vs BETC-BrownWon 21
W#1 DoublesMary Adkins / Amy Higgins vs MARILYN PORTER / Diane Weiser2-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesPamela Keller / Wendy Redding vs Ming Vuong / Brenda Fournier6-2, 1-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesBrenda Schlemlein / Barbara Patterson vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2020-10-24vs BC-Blazers-CurreyWon 21
L#1 DoublesQi Geng / Wendy Redding vs Bonnie Currey / Anne Bentley5-7, 6-6
W#2 DoublesMary Adkins / Amy Higgins vs Janet Johnson / Elizabeth Leider6-3, 7-5
W#3 DoublesBarbara Patterson / Brenda Schlemlein vs Karen Vanderhoek / Grace Newman7-5, 4-6, 1-0
2020-10-18vs CP-BairdLost 12
W#1 DoublesQi Geng / Mary Adkins vs Twyla Baird / Mary Czerwinski6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesLaura Rochford / Brenda Schlemlein vs Shannon Christiansen / Shelly Enstrom3-6, 6-6
L#3 DoublesPamela Keller / Barbara Patterson vs Sandra Gurtler / Lynn Christian3-6, 0-6
2020-09-27vs AYTC (OUTDOORS) Team Golden-BerlinLost 12
L#1 DoublesMary Adkins / Pamela Keller vs Ann Bowden / Monica Leers6-2, 2-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesLaura Rochford / Caprice Pine vs Kathy Trumbauer / Melanie Fix6-4, 0-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKoleen Morris / Qi Geng vs Susan Cross / Sandy Berlin6-4, 6-4
2020-09-13vs RBW-Net Worth Doubles-WilliamsLost 03
L#1 DoublesAmy Higgins / Mary Adkins vs Maren Gibson / Jill Schultz3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesPamela Keller / Qi Geng vs Jo Gartenberg / Hiroko Komiya2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesWendy Redding / Koleen Morris vs Patti Nikaitani / Dawn Williams6-7, 3-3
2020-09-06vs HBSQ-Sea-gals-SwingleLost 12
L#1 DoublesMary Adkins / Amy Higgins vs Kathryn Swingle / Jenny Wright1-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCaprice Pine / Laura Rochford vs Kim Eli / Julie Santos5-7, 2-6
W#3 DoublesBarbara Patterson / Wendy Redding vs Beth Lawson / Darla Schlumberger3-6, 7-5, 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 standings13 teams · 6.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Lower Woodland-Tenn-Acious-Whitman6118314135
2TCSP-55% Stuart6115616162
3HBSQ-Sea-gals-Swingle6114716155
4CAC/SL-Orange Crush-McPherson6115619163
5RBW-Net Worth Doubles-Williams5212921192
6AYTC (OUTDOORS) Team Golden-Berlin4312921175
7BETC-Iwasaki4391227212
8CP-La Cava3413821175
9CP-Baird25101123204
10MC-Schrock2581326187
11EDG-55+ and Fabulous Ladies-Pine2571429217
12BC-Blazers-Currey1671429228
13ETC-Double The Fun-Otterholt0721939245

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 2.76 estimated across 7 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.

3.28
Qi Geng
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.04
Laura Rochford
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.73
Amy Higgins
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.67
Brenda Schlemlein
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.63
Mary Adkins
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published 3
2.52
Pamela Keller
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
2.47
Wendy Redding
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
Caprice Pine
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 0
Koleen Morris
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 Higgins + Mary Adkins91049% games+1.3% vs expected
Qi Geng + Laura Rochford5448% games+0.2% vs expected
Pamela Keller + Amy Higgins4548% games−6.8% vs expected
Pamela Keller + Wendy Redding31336% games−15.7% vs expected
Wendy Redding + Amy Higgins5156% gamesnot enough data
Pamela Keller + Mary Adkins0537% gamesnot enough data
Laura Rochford + Brenda Schlemlein1447% gamesnot enough data
Pamela Keller + Brenda Schlemlein224 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
Qi Geng
64W–69L career · 4 lines in 2021
1%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Laura Rochford
96W–101L career · type A · 4 lines in 2021
37%63%<1%
3.04
3
Barbara Patterson
3W–6L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
3
Amy Higgins
90W–112L career · 4 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
2.73
3
Brenda Schlemlein
16W–36L career · 4 lines in 2021
10%89%<1%
2.67
3
Mary Adkins
34W–63L career · 7 lines in 2021
15%85%<1%
2.63
2.5
Pamela Keller
41W–85L career · 4 lines in 2021
0%44%56%
2.52
3
Wendy Redding
30W–50L career · 4 lines in 2021
59%41%<1%
2.47
0
Caprice Pine
21W–41L career · 3 lines in 2021
not enough data
Koleen Morris
1W–9L career · no lines in 2021
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.