Teams

Cramer/Texarkana

2025 Adult 55 & Over Spring League · 4.0 Women - Isolated

6 players · average NTRP 3.67 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-03-17vs Harrison/Demott/GHS/BPWon 20
W#1 DoublesKala Cramer / Beth Hawkins vs Cheryl Cooper / Diane Bischof6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesCarol Ketchum / Dee Healy vs Karen Demott / Kara Ford6-2, 7-5
2025-03-07vs Harrison/Demott/GHS/BPWon 20
W#1 DoublesCarol Ketchum / Dee Healy vs Diane Bischof / Karen Demott6-7, 6-3, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKala Cramer / Beth Hawkins vs Sara Barnett / Kara Ford6-1, 6-0
2025-02-28vs Harrison/Demott/GHS/BPWon 21
W#1 DoublesDee Healy / Carol Ketchum vs Lonna Hansen / Rhea Ruggles6-3, 7-6
L#2 DoublesBeth Hawkins / Sharon Ward vs Emily Hartsfield / Ruth Light4-6, 2-3
W#3 DoublesKala Cramer / Sabrena Hughes vs Carol Jones / Mary Harrison6-1, 6-1
2025-02-28vs Harrison/Demott/GHS/BPWon 30
W#1 DoublesKala Cramer / Sabrena Hughes vs Emily Hartsfield / Ruth Light4-6, 7-6
W#2 DoublesBeth Hawkins / Sharon Ward vs Carol Jones / Rhea Ruggles7-6, 6-2
W#3 DoublesCarol Ketchum / Dee Healy vs Cheryl Cooper / Sara Barnett6-1, 6-1
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 · 4.0 Women - Isolated
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Cramer/Texarkana4093887
2Harrison/Demott/GHS/BP043918118

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 3.66 estimated across 4 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.

3.86
Kala Cramer
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.80
Beth Hawkins
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.55
Carol Ketchum
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.42
Dee Healy
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Sabrena Hughes
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Sharon Ward
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.

Carol Ketchum + Kala Cramer5073% games+14.6% vs expected
Carol Ketchum + Dee Healy15855% games−4.8% vs expected
Beth Hawkins + Kala Cramer6170% gamesnot enough data
Sabrena Hughes + Kala Cramer303 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.

Kala Cramer
23W–3L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%85%14%
3.86
4
Beth Hawkins
17W–6L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.80
3.5
Carol Ketchum
35W–14L career · type A · 4 lines in 2025
<1%36%64%
3.55
3.5
Dee Healy
23W–20L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%73%27%
3.42
Sabrena Hughes
4W–4L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Sharon Ward
1W–0L career · no 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.