Teams

AR/Wallman/NWA

2023 Adult 70 & Over Multi-State Championship · 3.0 Women

5 players · average NTRP / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-04-27vs MO/VOGELWon 21
L#1 DoublesMaggie Johnston / Sandra Quinn vs Terri Loney / Cheryl Rupe0-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesLeslie Jones / Linda Wallman vs Colleen Justus / Ann Vogel6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesNorma Hamm / Sara Bainbridge vs Jo Cisna / Sharon Thompson6-2, 6-2
2023-04-26vs LA/SmithWon 20
W#1 DoublesSara Bainbridge / Norma Hamm vs Reeda Taylor / Jeannine McMahon6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesMaggie Johnston / Sandra Quinn vs Marlene Fontenot / Pam Haley6-1, 7-5
2023-04-25vs OK/Culver/TulsaLost 12
W#1 DoublesSandra Quinn / Leslie Jones vs Jo Ann Bodenstab / Michele Smith6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesNorma Hamm / Sara Bainbridge vs Deborah Lee / Bonnie Canfield4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesLinda Wallman / Maggie Johnston vs Georgia Burd / Vivienne Culver5-7, 6-0, 0-1
2023-04-25vs AR/Johnson/GHSWon 30
W#1 DoublesLeslie Jones / Sandra Quinn vs Faye Hudson / Cheri Williams6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesNorma Hamm / Sara Bainbridge vs Judy Starrett / Mary Galloway6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesLinda Wallman / Maggie Johnston vs Linda Taylor / Janet McAdams7-6, 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 standings10 teams · 3.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1AR/Wallman/NWA3184873
2AR/Dill/NLR319311100
3AR/Byrd/MtnHm317513107
4MO/VOGEL22751189
5TX/Vernor/San Antonio22751293
6LA/Smith226613100
7AR/Wood/LR226613104
8OK/Culver/Tulsa226613113
9AR/Johnson/GHS1321020132
10AR/Finton/HSV0421021138

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 2.88 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.

3.01
Norma Hamm
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.75
Linda Wallman
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Maggie Johnston
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Sandra Quinn
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Sara Bainbridge
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · 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.

Norma Hamm + Sara Bainbridge11364% games+12.3% vs expected
Maggie Johnston + Linda Wallman8557% games−5.5% vs expected
Sandra Quinn + Maggie Johnston213 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.

Norma Hamm
30W–7L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%47%53%
3.01
Linda Wallman
15W–8L career · 3 lines in 2023
3%95%3%
2.75
Maggie Johnston
14W–6L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Sandra Quinn
6W–1L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Sara Bainbridge
13W–3L career · 4 lines in 2023
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.