Teams

Belmont Colgin

2023 Richmond Adult 55 & Over Weeknight Women · Richmond Adult 55 & Over 8.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.80 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2023-08-01vs HCC WalshSplit 11
L#1 DoublesDana Wilson / Patricia Riester vs Jane Kauder / Sandra Dollar Shriner0-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesKim Michael / Silvia Sykes vs Marykay Stainback / Catherine Fallin6-2, 6-1
2023-07-31vs CCV BencksWon 30
W#1 DoublesDana Wilson / Silvia Sykes vs Elizabeth Fraizer / Susan Trigg7-6, 6-4
W#2 DoublesLee Moore / Jane Riddle vs Nancy Young / Mary Elizabeth Barnes3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesVictoria Bradt / Rebecca Morgan vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2023-07-20vs MTC Downing 8.0Lost 02
L#2 DoublesVictoria Bradt / Therese Jones vs Susan Nothnagle / Laurie Miller1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesMelissa Stewart / Paige Oostdyk vs Gale Tune / Janice McGarity6-7, 3-6
2023-07-13vs CCV BencksWon 30
W#1 DoublesVictoria Bradt / Silvia Sykes vs Susan Trigg / Melissa Mauck6-0, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJane Taft / Paige Oostdyk vs Jennifer Bencks / Mary Bartzen7-6, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMelissa Stewart / Patricia Riester vs Margaret Mickel / Paige Forrest6-2, 6-0
2023-07-06vs Burkwood KampingaLost 03
L#1 DoublesSilvia Sykes / Patricia Riester vs Marie Browning / Mary Davis1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesRebecca Morgan / Kim Michael vs Anne Murray / Nancy Row2-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMelissa Stewart / Cathie Tiernan vs Rochelle Purmasir / Gail Russell5-7, 1-6
2023-06-29vs ACAC StallardWon 20
W#1 DoublesVictoria Bradt / Silvia Sykes vs Liesl Delisio / Beth Vossler6-3, 1-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesPaige Oostdyk / Melissa Stewart vs Karen Zachary / Robin Petrine6-3, 6-1
2023-06-27vs HCC WalshLost 12
L#1 DoublesDana Wilson / Jane Taft vs Catherine Fallin / Susan Vonderlehr Nolan3-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCathie Tiernan / Therese Jones vs Marykay Stainback / Sherri Phillips4-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesJane Riddle / Lee Moore vs Pam Vossenberg / Jane Kauder5-7, 7-5, 1-0
2023-06-15vs MTC Downing 8.0Won 21
W#1 DoublesJane Taft / Silvia Sykes vs Maureen McGrath / Susan Nothnagle5-7, 6-3, 1-0
W#2 DoublesPatricia Riester / Melissa Stewart vs Nancy Reynolds / Diana Duddy6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLee Moore / Jane Riddle vs Erin Euen / Joy Lareau7-6, 4-6, 0-1
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 standings for Richmond Adult 55 & Over 8.0 Women 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 3.53 estimated across 13 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
Jane Taft
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.77
Rebecca Morgan
published
3.76
Silvia Sykes
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.75
Dana Wilson
published 4
3.65
Cathie Tiernan
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.61
Lee Moore
published
3.54
Patricia Riester
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.54
Paige Oostdyk
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.33
Jane Riddle
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.32
Jane Colgin
published 3.5
3.29
Victoria Bradt
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.29
Therese Jones
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.24
Kim Michael
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Melissa Stewart
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.

Therese Jones + Kim Michael31342% games−5.2% vs expected
Victoria Bradt + Silvia Sykes8351% games−7.3% vs expected
Victoria Bradt + Paige Oostdyk91048% gamesnot enough data
Jane Colgin + Jane Taft8753% gamesnot enough data
Victoria Bradt + Kim Michael6455% gamesnot enough data
Patricia Riester + Victoria Bradt2550% gamesnot enough data
Patricia Riester + Paige Oostdyk2438% gamesnot enough data
Therese Jones + Paige Oostdyk3349% 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.

4
Jane Taft
106W–67L career · 3 lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.77
Rebecca Morgan
15W–7L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.77
4
Silvia Sykes
102W–72L career · 6 lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.76
4
Dana Wilson
8W–5L career · no lines in 2023
3%93%4%
3.75
4
Cathie Tiernan
40W–50L career · 2 lines in 2023
14%86%1%
3.65
Lee Moore
18W–15L career · no lines in 2023
22%77%<1%
3.61
4
Patricia Riester
42W–47L career · 4 lines in 2023
39%61%<1%
3.54
4
Paige Oostdyk
62W–53L career · 3 lines in 2023
40%60%<1%
3.54
3.5
Jane Riddle
105W–67L career · 3 lines in 2023
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Jane Colgin
160W–148L career · no lines in 2023
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Victoria Bradt
150W–167L career · 4 lines in 2023
2%92%6%
3.29
Therese Jones
88W–122L career · 2 lines in 2023
2%92%6%
3.29
3.5
Kim Michael
126W–136L career · 2 lines in 2023
4%93%3%
3.24
Melissa Stewart
1W–1L career · no lines in 2023
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.