Teams

KS/Rinehart/Flynn/55&Over7.0W

2023 KS 55 & Over Adult League · 7.0 Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / KANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2023-04-01vs KSWC/White/Ball/55&Over7.0WWon 21
L#1 DoublesDebbie Flynn / Debra Schwarz vs Tahnee Maples / Libby Marshall6-3, 2-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesAngel Krishna / Cathy Rinehart vs Peggy Powell / Shirlene Shepard0-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesDelane Cohen / Candace Herman vs Linda Anderson / Lily Fang-Yen6-4, 6-2
2023-04-01vs KSWC/White/Ball/55&Over7.0WLost 12
W#1 DoublesDelane Cohen / Candace Herman vs Linda Anderson / Lily Fang-Yen6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesCarol Tenpenny / Kathy Hof vs Tahnee Maples / Libby Marshall0-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesDebbie Flynn / Angel Krishna vs Peggy Powell / Shirlene Shepard2-6, 3-6
L#1 DoublesCarol Tenpenny / Diana Holmes vs LaRhonda McDaniel / Jacqueline McGilbray4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesDebra Schwarz / Angel Krishna vs KIRAN Kumar / Bobbie Lee6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesDebbie Flynn / Cathy Rinehart vs Dotsie Cuillo / Janet Glaser6-2, 6-2
L#1 DoublesCathy Rinehart / Debbie Flynn vs LaRhonda McDaniel / Jacqueline McGilbray6-2, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesCarol Tenpenny / Kathy Hof vs Janet Glaser / Jennifer Lette7-5, 7-5
W#3 DoublesAngel Krishna / Debra Schwarz vs KIRAN Kumar / Bobbie Lee7-5, 4-6, 1-0
W#1 DoublesSusan Hoffman / Diana Holmes vs Bobbie Lee / KIRAN Kumar6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAngie Gleason / Candace Herman vs Patricia Thompson / Katherine Kryzer6-4, 5-4
W#1 DoublesDelane Cohen / Anne Miller vs KIRAN Kumar / Bobbie Lee6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesSusan Hoffman / Diana Holmes vs Katherine Kryzer / Patricia Thompson6-1, 6-2
2023-03-11vs KSWC/White/Ball/55&Over7.0WWon 30
W#1 DoublesKathy Hof / Carol Tenpenny vs Mary Barnes / Mitzi Hackney6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDebra Schwarz / Angel Krishna vs Cathy Suellentrop / DeAnn White4-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJan Roth / Susan Hoffman vs Peggy Powell / Marsha Mawhirter6-3, 6-3
2023-03-11vs KSWC/White/Ball/55&Over7.0WLost 12
W#1 DoublesKathy Hof / Carol Tenpenny vs Cathy Suellentrop / DeAnn White6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesDebra Schwarz / Angel Krishna vs Marsha Mawhirter / Peggy Powell2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesJan Roth / Susan Hoffman vs Linda Anderson / Lily Fang-Yen6-7, 2-4
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 standings3 teams · 7.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1KS/Rinehart/Flynn/55&Over7.0W6217718178
2KSWC/White/Ball/55&Over7.0W62141024194
3Kumar/Thompson - Genesis, Rock Road0851940264

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 3.27 estimated across 7 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.

3.56
Carol Tenpenny
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.37
Delane Cohen
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.32
Debbie Flynn
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.29
Angel Krishna
published 3.5
Debra Schwarz
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.18
Candace Herman
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.12
Angie Gleason
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.03
Cathy Rinehart
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Diana Holmes
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Jan Roth
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Kathy Hof
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Susan Hoffman
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · 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.

Candace Herman + Debbie Flynn9462% games+6.0% vs expected
Delane Cohen + Candace Herman10457% games+5.4% vs expected
Candace Herman + Cathy Rinehart221952% games+3.7% vs expected
Susan Hoffman + Carol Tenpenny81946% games+1.8% vs expected
Cathy Rinehart + Debbie Flynn6264% games−1.2% vs expected
Debra Schwarz + Cathy Rinehart2449% games−9.2% vs expected
Candace Herman + Angel Krishna1545% gamesnot enough data
Debra Schwarz + Debbie Flynn2451% 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
Carol Tenpenny
49W–78L career · 5 lines in 2023
34%65%<1%
3.56
3.5
Delane Cohen
107W–44L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%82%17%
3.37
3.5
Debbie Flynn
45W–35L career · 4 lines in 2023
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Angel Krishna
119W–113L career · no lines in 2023
2%92%6%
3.29
3.5
Debra Schwarz
36W–27L career · 5 lines in 2023
not enough data
3.5
Candace Herman
117W–119L career · 3 lines in 2023
10%89%1%
3.18
3.5
Angie Gleason
51W–39L career · 1 line in 2023
21%79%<1%
3.12
3.5
Cathy Rinehart
105W–75L career · 3 lines in 2023
42%58%<1%
3.03
3
Diana Holmes
6W–6L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Jan Roth
26W–23L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Kathy Hof
23W–35L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Susan Hoffman
28W–43L career · 4 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.