Teams

Brown K. 4.0W 40s Thurs PM

2024 Piedmont USTA 40 & Over · WOMEN 4.0 40 & Over

9 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
W#3 DoublesVirginia Easley / Karyn Efird vs Jaime Hendricks / Jody Wood6-3, 6-1
W#1 SinglesKaryn Efird vs Marlene Crewes7-5, 5-4
2024-04-25vs BECK 4.0W 40s Thurs PMWon 10
W#3 DoublesKaryn Efird / Virginia Easley vs Charlotte Boone / Cynthia Beck6-3, 6-2
2024-04-24vs Goy/Walker 4.0W 40s Thurs PMLost 01
L#3 DoublesVirginia Easley / Karyn Efird vs Melissa Gujrati / Linda Hestenes5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2024-04-04vs Warrick 4.0W 40s Thurs PMLost 01
L#2 DoublesKaryn Efird / Minerva Loran vs Marianna Bryce / Paige Yates2-6, 2-6
2024-03-28vs Nixon/Priest 4.0W 40s Thurs PMLost 01
L#1 DoublesVirginia Easley / Karyn Efird vs Yvonne Singh / Barbara Fry4-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesKaryn Efird / Minerva Loran vs Andrea Pollina / Trish Holder6-3, 6-1
2024-03-14vs Yates 4.0W 40s Thurs PMWon 10
W#2 DoublesVirginia Easley / Karyn Efird vs Andrea Jones / Kim Kyle6-2, 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 standings for WOMEN 4.0 40 & Over 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 3.56 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.

3.77
Virginia Easley
published
3.69
Pam McAmis
published
3.58
Karyn Efird
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.57
Tammy Dickenson
published
3.54
Minerva Loran
published
3.52
Kathy Hedgecock
published
3.48
Mary Batts
published
3.32
Kathy Brown
published
Angela Muller
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.

Kathy Brown + Tammy Dickenson2449% games−9.6% vs expected
Kathy Brown + Virginia Easley2346% gamesnot 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.

Virginia Easley
25W–19L career · no lines in 2024
2%94%4%
3.77
Pam McAmis
13W–23L career · no lines in 2024
8%92%1%
3.69
Karyn Efird
256W–113L career · 12 lines in 2024
<1%27%73%
3.58
Tammy Dickenson
5W–7L career · no lines in 2024
29%71%<1%
3.57
Minerva Loran
13W–18L career · no lines in 2024
39%61%<1%
3.54
Kathy Hedgecock
23W–13L career · no lines in 2024
<1%43%57%
3.52
Mary Batts
30W–19L career · no lines in 2024
<1%55%45%
3.48
Kathy Brown
14W–22L career · no lines in 2024
1%91%8%
3.32
3.5
Angela Muller
1W–2L career · no lines in 2024
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.