Teams

WSC-Neldam/Thim

2022 Adult 65 & Over · 7.0 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.28 / NORTHWEST WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-05-24vs HBSQ-ClarkLost 12
L#1 DoublesNancy Edwards / Nancy Roma vs Margaret Daniels / Ellen Johnson3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesTerry Yuan / Susan Thim vs Corliss Liekkio / Susan Fyall2-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesDebra Egge / Nancy Burdyshaw vs Leah Vitcovich / Patricia Liner3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2022-05-10vs BC-RiceWon 21
W#1 DoublesNancy Edwards / Nancy Roma vs Vikki Littleman / Paula Wells6-1, 6-0
L#2 DoublesJude Neldam / Debra Egge vs Sandra Rice / Beth Smith6-3, 6-7, 0-1
W#3 DoublesTerry Yuan / Kathleen Sheldon-Smith vs Bonnie Currey / Sandy Sterken6-1, 6-1
2022-05-06vs NTC-Pandemonium-StoneLost 03
L#1 DoublesKimberly Dirksen / Nancy Edwards vs Linda Brummett / Leona De Rocco4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesMaren Gibson / Mary Wiegenstein vs Fran Joy / Blair Stone2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesNancy Roma / Susan Thim vs Shelley Morrison / Jill Strohmeier6-7, 4-6
2022-04-29vs BETC-Racketeers-JenkinsWon 21
L#1 DoublesMary Wiegenstein / Maren Gibson vs Diane Euting / Janice Ferrera3-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesAnn Rae Smith / Terry Yuan vs Pamela Yorozu / Barbara Cotton6-7, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesNancy Edwards / Kimberly Dirksen vs Joan Edwards / Mary Louise Sumioka7-5, 5-7, 1-0
2022-04-18vs TCSP-EllisonWon 21
L#1 DoublesNancy Burdyshaw / Ann Rae Smith vs Sue Thompson / Wendy Ellison6-4, 1-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDebra Egge / Susan Thim vs Rosemary Curran / Kaji Dyson6-2, 7-5
W#3 DoublesJude Neldam / Nancy Roma vs Dolores Mirabella / Virginia Pflueger6-3, 6-0
2022-04-12vs RBW-Golden Girls-DoddWon 30
W#1 DoublesMaren Gibson / Mary Wiegenstein vs Lucille Barnard / Heidi Broecking6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesNancy Burdyshaw / Jude Neldam vs Cynthia Shimizu / Judy Rogers6-2, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKathleen Sheldon-Smith / Terry Yuan vs Nancy A Smith / Sandy Rudolph1-6, 6-4, 1-0
2022-04-05vs WSC-Serve Me a Double-EscobidoWon 21
W#1 DoublesMary Wiegenstein / Maren Gibson vs Susan Fascitelli / Lia Morrison4-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDebra Egge / Susan Thim vs Phyllis Gill / Tina Richards6-0, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesAnn Rae Smith / Jude Neldam vs Maureen Sunn / Grace Abraldes6-4, 6-7, 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 standings8 teams · 7.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1HBSQ-Clark7018311142
2NTC-Pandemonium-Stone6116513148
3WSC-Neldam/Thim5212925191
4BETC-Racketeers-Jenkins4313821174
5TCSP-Ellison3471430211
6BC-Rice2581330215
7RBW-Golden Girls-Dodd1661533223
8WSC-Serve Me a Double-Escobido0741737243

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 3.01 estimated across 10 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.

3.18
Nancy Roma
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.14
Susan Thim
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.13
Kimberly Dirksen
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.12
Terry Yuan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.11
Nancy Burdyshaw
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.06
Ann Rae Smith
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
3.01
Jude Neldam
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.86
Nancy Edwards
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.86
Debra Egge
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.62
Maren Gibson
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Mary Wiegenstein
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 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.

Susan Thim + Nancy Roma3349% games+10.2% vs expected
Debra Egge + Susan Thim4455% games+7.4% vs expected
Nancy Edwards + Nancy Roma4845% games+2.6% vs expected
Kimberly Dirksen + Nancy Roma111345% games+0.7% vs expected
Susan Thim + Nancy Burdyshaw2343% gamesnot enough data
Mary Wiegenstein + Maren Gibson224 matchesnot enough data
Debra Egge + Ann Rae Smith314 matchesnot enough data
Nancy Roma + Jude Neldam224 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
Nancy Roma
139W–145L career · 4 lines in 2022
9%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Susan Thim
47W–73L career · 4 lines in 2022
13%86%<1%
3.14
3.5
Kimberly Dirksen
117W–192L career · 2 lines in 2022
17%83%<1%
3.13
3.5
Terry Yuan
62W–46L career · 4 lines in 2022
18%82%<1%
3.12
3.5
Nancy Burdyshaw
98W–98L career · 3 lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
3.11
3
Ann Rae Smith
51W–84L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%31%69%
3.06
3
Jude Neldam
66W–59L career · type A · 4 lines in 2022
<1%46%54%
3.01
Nancy Edwards
111W–167L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%85%15%
2.86
3
Debra Egge
35W–72L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%86%14%
2.86
3
Maren Gibson
125W–130L career · 8 lines in 2022
18%82%<1%
2.62
Mary Wiegenstein
14W–14L career · 4 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.