Teams

WI Adult 55&O 7.0W NEL GBTC Smith Racquettes

2024 WI Adult 55 & Over · WI Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
W#1 DoublesJane Smith / Sue Roberts vs Maureen Burke / Beth Ryder6-0, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMelita Parker / Kristi Yates vs Lisa Brick / Mary Ann Christensen6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKim Perna / Julie van Saders vs Diane Pavek / Amy Fullerton6-1, 6-0
W#1 DoublesJulie van Saders / Kim Perna vs Lisa Brick / Holly Dudley7-5, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMelita Parker / Kristi Yates vs Rosario Clifford / Lori Monette6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKathy Kelly / Gretchen Romenesko vs Mary Ann Christensen / Amy Fullerton6-2, 6-3
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 standings6 teams · WI Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Adult 55&O 7.0W NEL GBTC Smith Racquettes9126414209
2WI Adult 55&O 7.0W NEL FCRC Van Harpen Spin&Tonic82201026235
3WI Adult 55&O 7.0W NEL WRFC Shannon Deuces Wild55151534266
4WI Adult 55&O 7.0W NEL WRFC Brick Lemon Drops55151535261
5WI Adult 55&O 7.0W NEL FCRC Backus Grey Geese37131738279
6WI Adult 55&O 7.0W NEL WRFC Anderson Swizzle Chic01012959358

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 3.03 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.

3.83
Sue Roberts
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.25
Melita Parker
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.02
Julie van Saders
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.85
Theresa Palasota
published
2.65
Gretchen Romenesko
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.60
Joan Matlock
published
Kim Perna
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Kristi Yates
usually #2 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.

Melita Parker + Theresa Palasota6549% gamesnot enough data
Kristi Yates + Kim Perna6457% gamesnot enough data
Kristi Yates + Melita Parker5357% gamesnot enough data
Kristi Yates + Sue Roberts1647% gamesnot enough data
Joan Matlock + Kim Perna1443% gamesnot enough data
Sue Roberts + Theresa Palasota213 matchesnot enough data
Joan Matlock + Gretchen Romenesko213 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.

Sue Roberts
75W–86L career · 1 line in 2024
1%90%9%
3.83
Melita Parker
69W–70L career · 4 lines in 2024
2%95%3%
3.25
Julie van Saders
17W–25L career · 2 lines in 2024
44%56%<1%
3.02
Theresa Palasota
102W–175L career · no lines in 2024
<1%87%13%
2.85
3
Gretchen Romenesko
21W–37L career · 1 line in 2024
12%88%<1%
2.65
Joan Matlock
27W–50L career · no lines in 2024
22%78%<1%
2.60
Kim Perna
35W–38L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Kristi Yates
50W–34L career · 2 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.