Teams

Ward/Arkadelphia

2025 Combo 65 & Over · 6.5 Women (Local League at State)

10 players · average NTRP 3.25 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-11-09vs Wenzler/NLR/BPLost 03
L#1 DoublesB J Hampton / Paulette Overton vs Sarah Hugen / Stephanie Petray2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesSusan Barron / Tracy Vickery vs Janice Carter / Kathy Mascuilli4-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesVicki Levins / Patti Peeler vs Felecia Knight / Dena Wenzler1-6, 5-7
2025-11-08vs Glover/NLR/BPLost 12
W#1 DoublesKathy Henson / Susan Roehrenbeck vs Susan Coleman / Diane Boland4-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesVicki Levins / Patti Peeler vs Jann Pharo / Lou Stevens2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesSusan Barron / Tracy Vickery vs Chris McGetrick / Carol Stapleton5-7, 6-2, 0-1
2025-11-08vs Venable/MH/TLTCLost 12
L#1 DoublesPaulette Overton / B J Hampton vs Nancy Decker / Phyllis Venable5-7, 1-6
L#2 DoublesPatti Peeler / Charlene Reinsch vs Carol Goldstein / Toni Fisher3-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesToni Harris / Joyce Stroud vs Sheila Sharp / Debbie Goolsby6-1, 6-2
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 · 6.5 Women (Local League at State)
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Venable/MH/TLTC3072667
2Glover/NLR/BP12271597
3Ward/Arkadelphia03271596

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 2.97 estimated across 5 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.

3.23
Charlene Reinsch
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.12
Kathy Henson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.04
Joyce Stroud
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
B J Hampton
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.74
Susan Roehrenbeck
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.73
Paulette Overton
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Patti Peeler
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Susan Barron
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Tracy Vickery
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Vicki Levins
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · 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.

B J Hampton + Paulette Overton4744% games−6.9% vs expected
Patti Peeler + Charlene Reinsch033 matchesnot enough data
Patti Peeler + Tracy Vickery303 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.

3.5
Charlene Reinsch
5W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
4%94%2%
3.23
Kathy Henson
34W–12L career · 1 line in 2025
19%81%<1%
3.12
Joyce Stroud
16W–16L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%39%61%
3.04
3
B J Hampton
9W–18L career · type A · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Susan Roehrenbeck
8W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
3%94%2%
2.74
Paulette Overton
14W–20L career · 2 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
2.73
Patti Peeler
3W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Susan Barron
0W–4L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tracy Vickery
4W–2L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Vicki Levins
0W–2L career · 2 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.