Teams

Criner

2025 Adult 55 & Over · Women 7.0

14 players · average NTRP 3.17 / ST. LOUIS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-06-04vs STL/Mrazek/55 Over7.0WLost 12
L#1 DoublesSharon Taysi / Karen Ebert Meyer vs Ellen Mrazek / Kelli McKie4-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesDina Scherrer / Kristina Hanley vs Michelle Whitson / Kimberly Gannon7-6, 4-3
L#3 DoublesKathy Hughes-Vazquez / Sabrina Siyanbola vs Victoria Yenzer / Ronda Hillermann0-6, 4-6
2025-05-28vs Steinhart/BorghiWon 21
W#1 DoublesKaren Ebert Meyer / Jacqueline Buck vs Sandra Johnson / Elizabeth Lueg6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDina Scherrer / Pam Manuel vs Jenn Nelson / Joan J Zilch6-3, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesDiane Lewis / Pam Henze vs Julie Ray / Sharon Dillane5-7, 1-6
2025-05-21vs CauseySplit 11
W#2 DoublesKaren Ebert Meyer / Sabrina Siyanbola vs Teresa Durbala / Jeanne Thayer0-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesBarbara Criner / Jane Herder vs Ann Finnegan / Linda van Allen2-6, 6-2, 0-1
2025-05-14vs Lemp/MalpiediLost 12
L#1 DoublesDiane Lewis / Kathy Hughes-Vazquez vs Norma Feldman / Jeanne Schutte2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJane Herder / Pam Henze vs Wendy Bell / Linda Woodard0-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesSharon Taysi / Kathy Lord vs Linda Eisenbeis / Cindy Grigg4-6, 6-1, 1-0
2025-05-10vs Blake/ReitzLost 12
L#1 DoublesKaren Ebert Meyer / Kathy Lord vs Suzanne Trotter / Vickie Brandt2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJacqueline Buck / Dina Scherrer vs Margaret West / Margaret Wright0-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesSabrina Siyanbola / Jane Herder vs Jacqueline Hamilton / Rhonda Kannapel6-0, 6-4
2025-04-26vs Boyd/EvekerLost 02
L#1 DoublesDina Scherrer / Sharon Taysi vs Ann Frawley / Karen Toal2-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesPam Manuel / Kathy Hughes-Vazquez vs Susan Riemann / Anne Skelton4-6, 6-2, 0-1
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 standings5 teams · Women 7.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1STL/Mrazek/55 Over7.0W6016212146
2Boyd/Eveker3371124173
3Causey2471125174
4Criner1571125175
5Steinhart/Borghi1551327191

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 3.08 estimated across 12 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.

3.54
Jane Herder
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.27
Kathy Hughes-Vazquez
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.26
Kristina Hanley
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.24
Denise Foley
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.14
Karen Ebert Meyer
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.14
Dina Scherrer
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.11
Sharon Taysi
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.09
Jacqueline Buck
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.92
Sabrina Siyanbola
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.75
Pam Henze
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.75
Pam Manuel
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
Diane Lewis
published 3
2.75
Barbara Criner
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Kathy Lord
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · 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.

Barbara Criner + Denise Foley3248% games+3.9% vs expected
Barbara Criner + Pam Manuel3442% games+3.8% vs expected
Diane Lewis + Pam Manuel3644% games−0.2% vs expected
Barbara Criner + Pam Henze1436% games−2.0% vs expected
Barbara Criner + Diane Lewis4937% games−8.1% vs expected
Barbara Criner + Jacqueline Buck2348% gamesnot enough data
Pam Manuel + Jacqueline Buck2346% gamesnot enough data
Kristina Hanley + Denise Foley4164% gamesnot 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.

Jane Herder
68W–74L career · 3 lines in 2025
38%62%<1%
3.54
Kathy Hughes-Vazquez
27W–105L career · 3 lines in 2025
95%5%<1%
3.27
Kristina Hanley
117W–86L career · 6 lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.26
3.5
Denise Foley
131W–102L career · 4 lines in 2025
4%93%3%
3.24
Karen Ebert Meyer
78W–99L career · 4 lines in 2025
16%84%1%
3.14
Dina Scherrer
55W–53L career · 4 lines in 2025
17%83%<1%
3.14
Sharon Taysi
69W–90L career · 3 lines in 2025
21%78%<1%
3.11
Jacqueline Buck
31W–50L career · 2 lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.09
Sabrina Siyanbola
45W–29L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%72%28%
2.92
Pam Henze
107W–244L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%93%4%
2.75
Pam Manuel
67W–125L career · 5 lines in 2025
3%93%4%
2.75
3
Diane Lewis
78W–135L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
3
Barbara Criner
72W–101L career · 1 line in 2025
4%93%4%
2.75
Kathy Lord
29W–28L 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.