Teams

Lumpkin Co High School-Gailey

2025 · 26 NEGTA USTA Adult 55 & Over - Fall

9 players · average NTRP 2.90 / GEORGIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-11-10vs City Park-SoutherWon 10
W#2 DoublesDebra Bolzenius / Phyllis Gailey vs Susan Bradley / Cathryn Sawyer6-2, 6-0
2025-11-03vs City Park-SoutherWon 10
W#3 DoublesLeisa Smith / Debra Bolzenius vs Alene KIesel / Susan Bradley6-2, 6-0
2025-10-27vs City Park-SoutherWon 10
W#3 DoublesDebra Bolzenius / Barbara Dumont vs Peggy Blackmon / Alene KIesel6-0, 6-1
2025-10-20vs City Park-SoutherWon 10
W#2 DoublesDebra Bolzenius / Leisa Smith vs Peggy Blackmon / Barbara Gilbert6-4, 6-2
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 · 26 NEGTA USTA Adult 55 & Over - Fall
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Lumpkin Co High School-Gailey511537109
2City Park-Souther1531531206

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 2.73 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.

2.99
Barb Miller
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.89
Angie Sisk
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #1 Singles 22% · published 3
2.80
Debra Bolzenius
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.72
Barbara Dumont
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.70
Leisa Smith
usually #3 Doubles 64%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published
2.68
Phyllis Gailey
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.61
Theresa Heffernan
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
2.48
Kerry Whitlock
usually #4 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Darcey Latzsch
usually #4 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
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.

Barb Miller + Phyllis Gailey12657% games+6.2% vs expected
Theresa Heffernan + Phyllis Gailey0733% games−6.3% vs expected
Leisa Smith + Angie Sisk2643% gamesnot enough data
Barb Miller + Leisa Smith2447% gamesnot enough data
Theresa Heffernan + Kerry Whitlock1435% gamesnot enough data
Barb Miller + Angie Sisk314 matchesnot enough data
Barbara Dumont + Theresa Heffernan123 matchesnot enough data
Barbara Dumont + Phyllis Gailey033 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
Barb Miller
20W–15L career · 10 lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
2.99
3
Angie Sisk
18W–14L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
2.89
3
Debra Bolzenius
6W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
2.80
3
Barbara Dumont
21W–23L career · 5 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
2.72
Leisa Smith
12W–24L career · 14 lines in 2026
8%91%2%
2.70
Phyllis Gailey
15W–24L career · 12 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
2.68
Theresa Heffernan
6W–19L career · 5 lines in 2026
22%78%<1%
2.61
Kerry Whitlock
5W–17L career · 7 lines in 2026
55%45%<1%
2.48
2.5
Darcey Latzsch
2W–9L career · 1 line 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.