Teams

PEAK-Thomas

2022 Adult 40 & Over · 3.0 WOMEN

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / EASTERN WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2022-05-21vs SRC-ChessarLost 12
L#1 DoublesJandi Stowell / Lisa Thomas vs Marianne Thompson / Charis Thatcher0-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesMaryLynn Dodd / Pamela Farley vs Teri Alexander / Judy Chessar6-3, 6-4
L#3 DoublesSusan Oliver / Catherine Hann vs Rasa Morris / Diane Tunnell4-6, 6-7
2022-05-21vs SC-SteinerLost 13
L#1 DoublesMaryLynn Dodd / Catherine Hann vs Krista Crotty / Ramona Higashi2-6, 0-6
L#1 SinglesShelly Matthews vs Stefanie Collins0-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesJody Wilson / Krystie Robbins vs Marian Menke / Shirlee Steiner5-7, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJandi Stowell / Lisa Thomas vs Sandee Andrews / Kathleen McIver3-6, 3-6
2022-05-20vs PC-All the SaSSLost 13
L#1 DoublesJandi Stowell / Susan Oliver vs LYNNETTE PIERCE / Danielle Dunigan5-7, 0-6
W#1 SinglesShelly Matthews vs Mauri Morgan6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesKrystie Robbins / Catherine Hann vs Jennifer Huebner / Heather Weber2-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesJody Wilson / Pamela Farley vs Mari Clark / Kristin Ruedel4-6, 3-6
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 3.0 WOMEN 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 2.87 estimated across 4 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.

3.37
Lisa Thomas
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.87
Jandi Stowell
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.80
MaryLynn Dodd
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Catherine Hann
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.44
Pamela Farley
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
Jody Wilson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 0
Krystie Robbins
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Shelly Matthews
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Susan Oliver
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.

Pamela Farley + MaryLynn Dodd111746% games+0.5% vs expected
Pamela Farley + Lisa Thomas123 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
Lisa Thomas
8W–17L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%<1%>99%
3.37
3
Jandi Stowell
22W–25L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%83%17%
2.87
MaryLynn Dodd
41W–42L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
2.80
3
Catherine Hann
9W–11L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Pamela Farley
27W–54L career · 2 lines in 2022
68%32%<1%
2.44
0
Jody Wilson
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Krystie Robbins
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Shelly Matthews
4W–3L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Oliver
6W–7L career · no lines in 2022
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.