Teams

SFranks-ENO

2025 Eno River Singles 40 & Over · 40 & Over Singles 4.0 Women Evening

8 players · average NTRP 3.67 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-07-08vs Post-Rust/McGill-DFCSplit 11
W#1 SinglesAmy Hoots vs Christa McGill6-3, 6-2
L#2 SinglesLaurie Straube vs Dayna Kelly2-6, 3-6
2025-07-01vs MLong-ENOWon 20
W#1 SinglesDana Cantrell vs Kim Peters6-4, 6-1
W#2 SinglesLaurie Straube vs Charmayne Rozenek6-0, 6-1
2025-06-17vs KFuller-ENOWon 20
W#1 SinglesCathy Joyce vs Leah Weinberger6-2
W#2 SinglesAmy Hoots vs Pamela Hankerson6-0, 6-0
2025-06-10vs EWyngaarden-HRLost 02
L#1 SinglesCathy Joyce vs Mary Feger2-6, 4-6
L#3 SinglesLaurie Straube vs Anne Sherow5-7, 4-6
2025-06-03vs Post-Rust/McGill-DFCSplit 11
W#1 SinglesCathy Joyce vs Amanda Lacoff6-2, 6-2
L#2 SinglesAmy Hoots vs Dayna Kelly6-3, 2-6, 1-0
2025-06-02vs MLong-ENOWon 20
W#1 SinglesAmy Hoots vs Kim Peters6-1, 7-5
W#3 SinglesDana Cantrell vs Sheza Healey6-1, 6-2
2025-05-22vs KFuller-ENOWon 30
W#1 SinglesCathy Joyce vs Leah Weinberger6-1, 6-3
W#2 SinglesAmy Hoots vs Roberta Hadley6-0, 6-1
W#3 SinglesLaurie Straube vs Pamela Hankerson6-1, 6-1
2025-05-06vs EWyngaarden-HRLost 01
L#1 SinglesDana Cantrell vs Tiffany Langino2-6, 3-6
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 40 & Over Singles 4.0 Women Evening 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 3.67 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.

4.13
Amy Hoots
usually #2 Singles 60%, also #1 Singles 40% · published 4
4.02
Cathy Joyce
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.72
Lorraine Hall
published
3.65
Elizabeth Chan
published 3.5
3.52
Dana Cantrell
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.51
Laurie Straube
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.48
Sarah Franks
published
3.31
Berna Tareen
published 3.5
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.

Sarah Franks + Laurie Straube7252% games+0.5% vs expected
Elizabeth Chan + Sarah Franks303 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.

4
Amy Hoots
107W–18L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%15%85%
4.13
4
Cathy Joyce
124W–32L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%45%55%
4.02
Lorraine Hall
53W–19L career · no lines in 2025
<1%4%96%
3.72
3.5
Elizabeth Chan
49W–20L career · no lines in 2025
<1%12%88%
3.65
3.5
Dana Cantrell
57W–40L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%45%55%
3.52
3.5
Laurie Straube
170W–122L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%46%54%
3.51
Sarah Franks
79W–39L career · no lines in 2025
<1%57%43%
3.48
3.5
Berna Tareen
9W–12L career · no lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31

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.