Teams

Lott Park - Hassen/Britain 3.5

2025 Adult 40 & Over Women Winter Day - Mobile · 3.5 Women Winter Day 40+

15 players · average NTRP 3.25 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2025-02-17vs Lott Park - Weed/RushLost 23
W#1 DoublesPamela Britain / Sarah Lilley vs Kimberly Weed / Terri Wilson6-2, 6-2
L#1 SinglesShannon Spinks vs Stephanie Boll3-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesJoanna Bass / Amanda Bruns vs Ruth Rye / Robina McDaniel6-4, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesPeri Summersell / Kelley Sikes vs Teal Creel / Hagan Anderson7-5, 6-2
L#4 DoublesAnne Canon / Kristin Wilson vs Tammy Rush / Mary Bradley2-6, 0-6
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 standings for 3.5 Women Winter Day 40+ 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 3.02 estimated across 14 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.

3.33
Sarah Lilley
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.19
Amanda Bruns
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.13
Shannon Spinks
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.11
Peri Summersell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.11
Kelley Sikes
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.08
Jill Hassen
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 30% · published
3.07
Marissa Rennaker
published
3.06
Erica Cross
published
3.04
Jennifer Mock
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
2.95
Fiona Stoner
published
2.91
Vicki Fowler
usually #4 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
2.84
Joanna Bass
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
2.81
Pamela Britain
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #4 Doubles 38% · published
2.67
Anne Canon
usually #4 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Jill Johnston
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.

Joanna Bass + Jill Hassen6164% games+11.4% vs expected
Sarah Lilley + Jill Hassen9070% games+9.4% vs expected
Jill Hassen + Vicki Fowler4357% games+8.1% vs expected
Pamela Britain + Vicki Fowler4551% games+5.9% vs expected
Pamela Britain + Anne Canon213 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.

Sarah Lilley
24W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
1%87%12%
3.33
3.5
Amanda Bruns
1W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
9%90%1%
3.19
Shannon Spinks
52W–38L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%17%83%
3.13
Peri Summersell
7W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
21%78%<1%
3.11
Kelley Sikes
5W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
22%78%<1%
3.11
Jill Hassen
35W–17L career · 10 lines in 2025
<1%27%73%
3.08
Marissa Rennaker
2W–10L career · no lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.07
Erica Cross
2W–9L career · no lines in 2025
34%66%<1%
3.06
Jennifer Mock
25W–9L career · 5 lines in 2025
37%63%<1%
3.04
Fiona Stoner
16W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%64%36%
2.95
Vicki Fowler
19W–22L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
2.91
Joanna Bass
29W–25L career · 7 lines in 2025
1%87%13%
2.84
Pamela Britain
33W–39L career · 8 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
2.81
3
Anne Canon
12W–23L career · 3 lines in 2025
12%88%1%
2.67
Jill Johnston
3W–4L 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.