Egerton 40s 4.0W Fri AM
2026 Piedmont USTA 40 & Over · WOMEN 4.0 40 & Over
17 players · average NTRP 4.00 / NORTH CAROLINA
No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.
Schedule8 played
i
Flight standings17 teams · WOMEN 4.0 40 & Over
| Team | W | L | Sets lost | Games lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1Goy 40s 4.0W Thurs PM | 8 | 0 | 18 | 193 |
| 2Mcfarlin/Guglielmo 40s 4.0W Fri AM | 7 | 1 | 15 | 176 |
| 3Bettinger/Bryce 40s 4.0W Fri AM | 7 | 1 | 22 | 194 |
| 4Egerton 40s 4.0W Fri AM | 6 | 2 | 21 | 201 |
| 5Adams 40s 4.0W Thurs PM | 5 | 3 | 17 | 172 |
| 6Nixon/Priest 40s 4.0W Thurs PM | 5 | 3 | 24 | 205 |
| 7Warrick 40s 4.0W Thurs PM | 5 | 3 | 27 | 221 |
| 8Baker/Rodriguez 40s 4.0W Fri AM | 5 | 3 | 27 | 231 |
| 9Harlan 40s 4.0W Fri AM | 4 | 4 | 21 | 179 |
| 10Pyrtle 40s 4.0W Fri AM | 4 | 4 | 29 | 228 |
| 11Brown 40s 4.0W Thurs PM | 3 | 5 | 26 | 205 |
| 12Taylor/Andree 40s 4.0W Thurs PM | 3 | 5 | 30 | 229 |
| 13Rosenbower 40s 4.0W Fri AM | 2 | 6 | 33 | 223 |
| 14Beck 40s 4.0W Thurs PM | 2 | 6 | 39 | 255 |
| 15Jones 40s 4.0W Thurs PM | 1 | 7 | 38 | 240 |
| 16Clancy 40s 4.0W Fri AM | 1 | 7 | 43 | 272 |
| 17Milam 40W 40s Fri AM | 0 | 8 | 40 | 256 |
Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.
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 3.69 estimated across 17 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.
Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.
| Sara Nundkumar + Michele Alvarino | 3–2 | 57% games | +6.2% vs expected |
| Sue English + Kathryn Egerton | 2–3 | 38% games | −9.1% vs expected |
| Catherine Egerton + Erin Richardson | 8–8 | 53% games | not enough data |
| Erin Richardson + Natasha Hilburn | 5–8 | 45% games | not enough data |
| Lauren Nutt + Catherine Egerton | 7–4 | 53% games | not enough data |
| Catherine Egerton + Holly Parr | 4–3 | 59% games | not enough data |
| Catherine Egerton + Natasha Hilburn | 1–4 | 45% games | not enough data |
| Holly Parr + Natasha Hilburn | 3–2 | 65% games | not enough data |
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.
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.