Teams

Montana/Bean/55&Over

2025 USTA Adult 55 & Over · Women 6.0 - 55 & Over

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / MONTANA

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 →
Schedule3 played
2025-08-10vs 55 6.0 Q TeamSplit 11
W#1 DoublesKathleen Bean / Juli McLain vs Joan Johnston / Becky Wilcox6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesSheila Schaub / Patrisha Crisp vs Nancy Bohyer / Mary Dill2-6, 1-6
2025-08-09vs 55 6.0 Q TeamWon 21
W#1 DoublesJan Schweitzer / Judy Klein vs Mardi Robers / Becky Wilcox6-0, 6-0
L#2 DoublesGinni McHugh / Kathleen Bean vs Nancy Winslow / Dawn Schwartz7-6, 1-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesPatrisha Crisp / Sheila Schaub vs Joan Johnston / Mary Dill6-2, 6-4
2025-08-08vs 55 6.0 Q TeamLost 12
W#1 DoublesJan Schweitzer / Judy Klein vs Nancy Bohyer / Mary Dill6-0, 6-0
L#2 DoublesJuli McLain / Delis Olsen vs Mardi Robers / Nancy Winslow7-6, 6-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesKathleen Bean / Ginni McHugh vs Dawn Schwartz / Becky Wilcox4-6, 4-6
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 standings2 teams · Women 6.0 - 55 & Over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Montana/Bean/55&Over2154863
255 6.0 Q Team12451292

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 2.72 estimated across 3 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.

3.00
Judy Klein
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
2.59
Delis Olsen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.57
Patrisha Crisp
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
Ginni McHugh
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Jan Schweitzer
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Juli McLain
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Kathleen Bean
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Sheila Schaub
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Kathleen Bean + Ginni McHugh224 matchesnot enough data
Kathleen Bean + Patrisha Crisp123 matchesnot enough data
Kathleen Bean + Juli McLain123 matchesnot enough data
Sheila Schaub + Judy Klein123 matchesnot enough data
Jan Schweitzer + Judy Klein213 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
Judy Klein
32W–27L career · 5 lines in 2025
49%51%<1%
3.00
3
Delis Olsen
5W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
26%74%<1%
2.59
2.5
Patrisha Crisp
14W–37L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%31%69%
2.57
Ginni McHugh
3W–3L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jan Schweitzer
8W–13L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Juli McLain
7W–18L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kathleen Bean
21W–16L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Sheila Schaub
16W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
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.