Teams

Camilla/Shiver

2026 Flint River USTA Adult 55 & Over - Fall '25 · Women 4.0

8 players · average NTRP 3.50 / GEORGIA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-11-23vs Thomasville/ThriffileySplit 11
W#1 DoublesCindy Anglin / Patty Lee vs Kim Thriffiley / Elaine Rudd6-0, 7-6
L#2 DoublesSusan Rivers / Lane Norton vs Joan Bassett / Elizabeth Murray6-4, 1-6, 0-1
2025-11-16vs Thomasville/ThriffileyLost 12
L#1 DoublesHolly Perryman / Jennifer Powell vs Sherry Cady / Lisa Franson6-4, 2-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesSusan Rivers / Lane Norton vs Elizabeth Murray / Kim Thriffiley6-4, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesCindy Anglin / Jennifer Winegardner vs Joan Bassett / Gina Herring6-3, 6-1
2025-11-09vs Thomasville/ThriffileyWon 20
W#1 DoublesHolly Perryman / Patty Lee vs Lisa Franson / Sherry Cady7-5, 0-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCindy Anglin / Jennifer Winegardner vs Melissa Johnson / Elizabeth Murray6-2, 0-6, 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 standings2 teams · Women 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Camilla/Shiver3072869
2Bainbridge/Heard03271591

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 3.33 estimated across 6 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.

3.58
Cindy Anglin
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.52
Jennifer Winegardner
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.47
Patty Lee
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.43
Holly Perryman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.29
Becky Bush
published 3.5
2.72
Carol Shiver
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
Lane Norton
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Rivers
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Jennifer Winegardner + Becky Bush6253% games+4.7% vs expected
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.

4
Cindy Anglin
6W–8L career · 3 lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
3.58
3.5
Jennifer Winegardner
195W–211L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%45%55%
3.52
Patty Lee
14W–1L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%59%41%
3.47
Holly Perryman
1W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
70%30%<1%
3.43
3.5
Becky Bush
17W–10L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.29
3
Carol Shiver
9W–12L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
2.72
Lane Norton
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Susan Rivers
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
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.