Teams

APEX.Long

2023 CTRL Adult 40 & Over · Adult 40 & Over 3.0 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

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

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2023-05-07vs TOC.TerjesenLost 02
L#1 DoublesMary T Long / Nancy Sickel vs Connie Haynes / Sheila Breckenridge2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesJennifer Edmunds / Vickie Gibbs vs Lisa Mason / Louise Hutchinson1-6, 0-6
2023-04-22vs TOC.MurrellLost 01
L#1 DoublesNancy Sickel / Mary T Long vs Kari Lovetinsky / Sharon Herschman6-7, 3-6
2023-04-16vs MD.OldhamWon 10
W#3 DoublesDebbie Castiller / Jennifer Magee vs Ashley McMillan / Rochelle Roth6-7, 6-1, 1-0
2023-04-13vs TOC.BurrLost 01
L#2 DoublesJennifer Magee / Debbie Castiller vs Lisa Bakowski / Christine Burr2-6, 3-6
2023-03-19Won 10
W#2 DoublesMary T Long / Nancy Sickel vs Marialena Fuenzalida / Sherry Miloscia6-0, 6-0
2023-03-05vs TOC.LeahyLost 01
L#2 DoublesVickie Gibbs / Sally Kennedy vs Cecily Peterson / Susan Stover1-6, 3-6
2023-02-26vs TOC.BlancLost 01
L#3 DoublesKimberly Lamm / Judith Mapstone vs Caroline Graff / Pamela Godwin0-6, 0-6
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 Adult 40 & Over 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 2.67 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.

3.09
Nancy Sickel
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.08
Debbie Castiller
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.89
Jennifer Hellrung
published
2.78
Mary T Long
published
2.54
Kimberly Lamm
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.39
Jennifer Edmunds
published
2.36
Vickie Gibbs
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.23
Judith Mapstone
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.

Kimberly Lamm + Debbie Castiller5258% gamesnot enough data
Debbie Castiller + Nancy Sickel213 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 Sickel
62W–75L career · 3 lines in 2023
26%74%<1%
3.09
3
Debbie Castiller
189W–106L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%29%71%
3.08
Jennifer Hellrung
5W–7L career · no lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
2.89
Mary T Long
27W–68L career · no lines in 2023
2%92%6%
2.78
3
Kimberly Lamm
86W–102L career · 1 line in 2023
37%63%<1%
2.54
Jennifer Edmunds
9W–27L career · no lines in 2023
79%21%<1%
2.39
2.5
Vickie Gibbs
54W–74L career · 2 lines in 2023
0%84%16%
2.36
Judith Mapstone
0W–11L career · no lines in 2023
98%2%<1%
2.23

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.