Teams

Venable/MH

2026 Adult 55 & Over Spring 1 League · 3.5 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.25 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-04-25vs Lucky/McGeheeWon 20
W#1 DoublesPhyllis Venable / Nancy Decker vs Julie West / Stephanie Bierbaum6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesCheryl Ballou / Linda Robertson vs Roxanne Smith / Kelly Keller6-1, 6-0
2026-04-25vs Lucky/McGeheeWon 20
W#1 DoublesCheryl Ballou / Linda Robertson vs Stephanie Bierbaum / Terry Wood6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesPhyllis Venable / Nancy Decker vs Roxanne Smith / Kelly Keller6-0, 6-0
2026-04-19vs Lucky/McGeheeWon 30
W#1 DoublesNancy Decker / Phyllis Venable vs Stephanie Bierbaum / Susan Frost6-3, 7-6
W#2 DoublesToni Fisher / Lorie Whitby vs Julie West / Terry Wood6-7, 3-2
W#3 DoublesJennifer Houghtaling / Carolyn Kelley vs Dodie Griffin / Alesia Lucky6-2, 6-3
2026-04-19vs Lucky/McGeheeLost 12
L#1 DoublesNancy Decker / Phyllis Venable vs Stephanie Bierbaum / Susan Frost3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesToni Fisher / Lorie Whitby vs Julie West / Terry Wood6-2, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesCarolyn Kelley / Jennifer Houghtaling vs Dodie Griffin / Alesia Lucky6-1, 6-1
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 standings3 teams · 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Venable/MH3184982
2Lucky/McGehee1321020133
3Wilf/RR/Tex000000

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 3.06 estimated across 8 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.

3.22
Lorie Whitby
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.17
Cheryl Ballou
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.10
Toni Fisher
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.05
Linda Robertson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.05
Jennifer Houghtaling
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.03
Nancy Decker
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.97
Phyllis Venable
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.88
Carolyn Kelley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
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.

Nancy Decker + Phyllis Venable15955% games+4.4% vs expected
Nancy Decker + Linda Robertson2642% games−8.3% vs expected
Carolyn Kelley + Jennifer Houghtaling404 matchesnot enough data
Carolyn Kelley + Linda Robertson044 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.

Lorie Whitby
15W–20L career · 2 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Cheryl Ballou
45W–49L career · 2 lines in 2026
12%87%1%
3.17
Toni Fisher
4W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.10
Linda Robertson
10W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
36%64%<1%
3.05
Jennifer Houghtaling
12W–0L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%37%63%
3.05
Nancy Decker
18W–17L career · 4 lines in 2026
42%58%<1%
3.03
Phyllis Venable
15W–18L career · 4 lines in 2026
58%42%<1%
2.97
3
Carolyn Kelley
10W–16L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
2.88

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.