Teams

Elings-English Muffins

Adult 55 & Over - SB · 8.0 Combo Women

15 players · average NTRP 3.81 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2022-08-28vs SBTC-55 & Fabulous!Won 21
L#1 DoublesDeborah Carlen / Kristen Kovacs vs Becky Cantrell / Julie Rosenthal7-5, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesTerrie Bugay / Sally Jordan vs Katharyn Hagen / Cindy Steffen6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesNina Gustason / Michelle Seagraves vs Lacy Selby / Rosemary Talmadge6-3, 6-4
2022-08-21vs SBTC-55 & Fabulous!Won 21
W#1 DoublesTerrie Bugay / Sally Jordan vs Julie Rosenthal / Lacy Selby6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesPaula Skokowski / Deborah Carlen vs Rosemary Talmadge / Gigi Hollister6-1, 6-1
L#3 DoublesNina Gustason / Beth Ford vs Naomi Eskenazi / Monica Kunz1-6, 3-6
2022-08-14vs SBTC-55 & Fabulous!Won 30
W#1 DoublesPaula Skokowski / Deborah Carlen vs Rosemary Talmadge / Gigi Hollister6-1, 7-5
W#2 DoublesBeth Ford / Michelle Seagraves vs Becky Cantrell / Naomi Eskenazi6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesJaclyn Park / Nancy Garrison vs Julie Rosenthal / Lacy Selby6-1, 7-6
2022-08-07vs SBTC-55 & Fabulous!Won 21
W#1 DoublesKristen Kovacs / Terrie Bugay vs Gigi Hollister / Rosemary Talmadge6-4, 7-6
L#2 DoublesJoann Hollingshead / Roxanne Clare vs Cindy Steffen / Beverly Aronson1-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesNancy Garrison / Nina Gustason vs Julie Rosenthal / Peggy Brentlinger6-3, 6-3
2022-07-24vs SBTC-55 & Fabulous!Won 30
W#1 DoublesKristen Kovacs / Paula Skokowski vs Becky Cantrell / Gigi Hollister7-5, 6-4
W#2 DoublesBeth Ford / Sally Jordan vs Katharyn Hagen / Katy Bazylewicz6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesNina Gustason / Roxanne Clare vs Naomi Eskenazi / Beverly Aronson3-6
2022-07-17vs SBTC-55 & Fabulous!Lost 12
L#1 DoublesKristen Kovacs / Beth Ford vs Becky Cantrell / Monica Kunz1-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesDeborah Carlen / Sally Jordan vs Cindy Steffen / Beverly Aronson6-7, 6-2, 0-1
W#3 DoublesPaula Skokowski / Michelle Seagraves vs Sally Smith / Peggy Brentlinger6-0, 6-0
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 · 8.0 Combo Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Elings-English Muffins5113511124
2SBTC-55 & Fabulous!1551328195

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 3.48 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.

4.01
Beth Ford
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.80
Nancy Garrison
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.73
Paula Skokowski
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.67
Kristen Kovacs
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.61
Deborah Carlen
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.49
Michelle Seagraves
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.46
Patricia English
published
3.35
Joann Hollingshead
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.30
Jaclyn Park
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.25
Catherine Gautier
published 3.5
3.21
Jennifer Slayman
published
3.19
Sally Jordan
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.14
Nina Gustason
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Roxanne Clare
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Terrie Bugay
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Deborah Carlen + Paula Skokowski11357% games+5.3% vs expected
Nina Gustason + Jaclyn Park5851% games+0.9% vs expected
Kristen Kovacs + Paula Skokowski9751% games+0.7% vs expected
Nina Gustason + Catherine Gautier2842% games−5.2% vs expected
Patricia English + Kristen Kovacs0538% games−14.9% vs expected
Sally Jordan + Beth Ford4257% gamesnot enough data
Beth Ford + Terrie Bugay5067% gamesnot enough data
Sally Jordan + Roxanne Clare224 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.

4
Beth Ford
89W–28L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%47%53%
4.01
Nancy Garrison
31W–17L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.80
4
Paula Skokowski
51W–34L career · 4 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Kristen Kovacs
64W–86L career · 4 lines in 2022
10%90%1%
3.67
4
Deborah Carlen
24W–19L career · 4 lines in 2022
19%80%<1%
3.61
4
Michelle Seagraves
41W–15L career · type S · 3 lines in 2022
53%47%<1%
3.49
Patricia English
28W–39L career · no lines in 2022
64%36%<1%
3.46
Joann Hollingshead
12W–34L career · 1 line in 2022
88%12%<1%
3.35
3.5
Jaclyn Park
86W–80L career · 1 line in 2022
1%93%6%
3.30
3.5
Catherine Gautier
47W–43L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.25
Jennifer Slayman
11W–12L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.21
Sally Jordan
38W–21L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%8%92%
3.19
3.5
Nina Gustason
75W–99L career · 4 lines in 2022
14%86%<1%
3.14
Roxanne Clare
20W–23L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Terrie Bugay
17W–7L career · 3 lines in 2022
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.