Teams

Burns/40s/6.5/PAC

2026 Man · Cov Southern Combo 40 & Over - Women Night

14 players · average NTRP 3.17 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 upcoming
Sep 14 6:00 PM
Pelican Athletic Club
Sep 21 6:00 PM
Pelican Athletic Club
Sep 28 6:00 PM
vs N/A
Molly BurnsKelly Greer
Oct 5 7:30 PM
Pelican Athletic Club
Oct 12 6:00 PM
North Cypress Fitness
Flight standings3 teams · Cov Southern Combo 40 & Over - Women Night
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Doyle/40s/6.5/PAC2060130
2Burns/40s/6.5/PAC0103633
3Anzalone/40s/6.5/NC0103638

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 2.99 estimated across 6 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.

3.21
Dana Gegenheimer
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published 3.5
3.05
Ana Perdigao
usually #1 Singles 31%, also #2 Singles 23% · published 3
3.03
Molly Burns
usually #2 Doubles 62%, also #3 Doubles 14% · published
2.97
Laura Bonanno
usually #2 Doubles 53%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
2.87
Amy St. Romain
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 39% · published 3
2.85
Kristin Higbee
usually #1 Doubles 41%, also #3 Doubles 24% · published
Jeanne Woodrick
usually #1 Singles 39%, also #3 Doubles 23% · published
Kim Kocken
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 32% · published
Melissa Love
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Pamela Owen
usually #2 Doubles 58%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Paula Stein
usually #1 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 42% · published
Peggy Benit
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Rebecca Sandoz
usually #3 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 35% · published
Sonia Maltais
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · 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.

Rebecca Sandoz + Amy St. Romain213 matchesnot enough data
Rebecca Sandoz + Jeanne Woodrick123 matchesnot enough data
Kim Kocken + Molly Burns303 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
Dana Gegenheimer
6W–19L career · type A · 8 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.21
3
Ana Perdigao
12W–13L career · 11 lines in 2026
<1%37%63%
3.05
Molly Burns
33W–13L career · 20 lines in 2026
<1%43%57%
3.03
Laura Bonanno
21W–16L career · 17 lines in 2026
<1%59%41%
2.97
3
Amy St. Romain
15W–11L career · 18 lines in 2026
<1%82%17%
2.87
Kristin Higbee
23W–20L career · 16 lines in 2026
1%85%14%
2.85
Jeanne Woodrick
10W–21L career · 13 lines in 2026
not enough data
Kim Kocken
37W–25L career · 25 lines in 2026
not enough data
Melissa Love
2W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
not enough data
Pamela Owen
10W–13L career · 12 lines in 2026
not enough data
Paula Stein
7W–6L career · 12 lines in 2026
not enough data
Peggy Benit
8W–7L career · 7 lines in 2026
not enough data
Rebecca Sandoz
29W–18L career · 23 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sonia Maltais
2W–8L career · 5 lines 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.