Teams

Wentz/Knoxville

2026 Tri-Level 65 & Over-Knoxville · 4.0,3.5,3.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.20 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-03-07vs Worrell/KnoxvilleWon 21
L#1 DoublesMary Sneed / Elizabeth Campbell vs Joan Ewers / Katty McFee2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesNancy Wentz / Debbie Ashton vs Donna Worrell / Carol Irick6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMary Vineyard / Elaine Vandiver vs Diane Williams / Sylvia Astrop6-4, 6-4
2026-03-06vs Worrell/KnoxvilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesMary Sneed / Elizabeth Campbell vs Joan Ewers / Katty McFee2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesNancy Wentz / Angie Herzog vs Janice Whitehead / Karen Benedict6-2, 6-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMary Vineyard / Fairy Coleman vs Martha Wilds / Debra Chaniott3-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-03-01vs Worrell/KnoxvilleWon 21
L#1 DoublesMary Sneed / Elizabeth Campbell vs Katty McFee / Joan Ewers6-4, 0-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesNancy Wentz / Angie Herzog vs Janice Whitehead / Donna Worrell7-6, 6-3
W#3 DoublesMary Vineyard / Gail Rieger vs Linda Dayringer / Debra Chaniott7-5, 7-6
2026-02-14vs Worrell/KnoxvilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Campbell / LuAnne Zelasko vs Janice Whitehead / Joan Ewers6-7, 2-6
W#2 DoublesAngie Herzog / Debbie Ashton vs Mary Wilson / Carolyn Hutsell2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSusan Pappas / Elaine Vandiver vs Martha Wilds / Lila Downs3-6, 4-6
2026-02-07vs Worrell/KnoxvilleWon 21
L#1 DoublesLuAnne Zelasko / Elizabeth Campbell vs Joan Ewers / Katty McFee1-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesDebbie Ashton / Angie Herzog vs Sandy Hodson / Carolyn Hutsell6-3, 6-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSusan Pappas / Elaine Vandiver vs Janis Crye / Joy Benson4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2026-01-17vs Worrell/KnoxvilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesNancy Wentz / LuAnne Zelasko vs Janice Whitehead / Katty McFee6-7, 1-6
W#2 DoublesAngie Herzog / Debbie Ashton vs Sandra Smith / Mary Wilson6-3, 6-2
L#3 DoublesMary Vineyard / Fairy Coleman vs Linda Dayringer / Debra Chaniott6-1, 6-7, 0-1
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 standings1 teams · 4.0,3.5,3.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Wentz/Knoxville339922181

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 3.09 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.

3.66
Mary Sneed
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.31
Angie Herzog
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.25
Debbie Ashton
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.10
LuAnne Zelasko
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.01
Elaine Vandiver
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.94
Mary Vineyard
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.80
Susan Pappas
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Fairy Coleman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.66
Gail Rieger
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.

Debbie Ashton + Angie Herzog303 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.

Mary Sneed
13W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
10%89%<1%
3.66
3.5
Angie Herzog
37W–57L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Debbie Ashton
10W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%95%3%
3.25
LuAnne Zelasko
3W–20L career · 3 lines in 2026
22%78%<1%
3.10
3
Elaine Vandiver
10W–15L career · type A · 3 lines in 2026
<1%48%52%
3.01
Mary Vineyard
12W–29L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%67%33%
2.94
Susan Pappas
10W–19L career · 2 lines in 2026
94%6%<1%
2.80
3
Fairy Coleman
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
3
Gail Rieger
9W–13L career · 1 line in 2026
10%89%<1%
2.66

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.