Teams

Force Fields

Adult 55 & Over Spring · 8.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.90 / PHILADELPHIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2024-06-13vs GCC Wise AcesLost 03
L#1 DoublesAnne Fields / Anne Russell vs Rosemary Kearney / Sonya Lee7-6, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesChristine Fitzpatrick / Pamela M Barbon vs Monica Rogozinski / Yanhong Feng6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesDaniele Ouellet / Brenda Weckerly vs Kay Sickles / Cricket Brosius1-6, 3-6
2024-06-12vs GCC Wise AcesWon 30
W#1 DoublesTina Test / Lisa Jablon vs Rosemary Kearney / Lynn Selhat7-6, 6-4
W#2 DoublesMichelle Avery / Daniele Ouellet vs Yanhong Feng / Patricia Szipszky6-4, 7-6
W#3 DoublesAmy Christine / Anne Fields vs Joyce Shiau / Ming Chen Pu2-6, 6-2, 1-0
2024-06-09vs Cynwyd ShotsLost 12
W#1 DoublesLisa Jablon / Daniele Ouellet vs Melinda Tuan / Nan Barash6-4, 6-4
L#2 DoublesAnne Fields / Brenda Weckerly vs Deborah Hoppy / Marjorie Volpp6-1, 5-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesPamela M Barbon / Tina Test vs Lorena Chambers / Lori Eisner2-6, 6-3, 0-1
2024-05-19vs SZA 8.0 55&OverLost 03
L#1 DoublesAnne Russell / Christine Fitzpatrick vs Tracy Giannini / Kim Burian2-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesPamela M Barbon / Lisa Jablon vs Barbara Michener / Maria Morano5-7, 1-6
L#3 DoublesMichelle Avery / Jacqueline Powell vs Nina Drinnan / Sheila Gorman0-6, 6-4, 0-1
2024-04-28vs SZA 8.0 55&OverLost 12
L#1 DoublesChristine Fitzpatrick / Tina Test vs Tracy Giannini / Kim Burian2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesAmy Christine / Anne Russell vs Linda Mudditt / Marianne Paparone7-6, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesLisa Jablon / Brenda Weckerly vs Mary Vecchiolla / Robin Abramo6-3, 6-0
2024-04-21vs Cynwyd ShotsWon 21
W#1 DoublesAileen Wetton-Garofalo / Carol Greenberg vs Shelly Rabuse / Emily Morgan4-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesLisa Jablon / Michelle Avery vs Nan Barash / Devany Penne3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesAmy Christine / Anne Fields vs Deborah Hoppy / Pierette Appasamy4-6, 6-3, 1-0
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 standings4 teams · 8.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SZA 8.0 55&Over0616210121
2GCC Wise Aces069922166
3Force Fields0671125182
4Cynwyd Shots0641432205

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 3.52 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.

4.13
Carol Greenberg
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.86
Anne Russell
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.72
Lisa Jablon
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.67
Tina Test
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.66
Amy Christine
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.65
Pamela M Barbon
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.62
Daniele Ouellet
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.46
Christine Fitzpatrick
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.39
Jacqueline Powell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.38
Sharon Bartle
published
3.23
Michelle Avery
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.23
Aileen Wetton-Garofalo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.17
Brenda Weckerly
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.15
Anne Fields
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
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.

Anne Russell + Tina Test3263% games+7.1% vs expected
Aileen Wetton-Garofalo + Carol Greenberg3349% games+0.4% vs expected
Amy Christine + Tina Test3350% games−1.3% vs expected
Amy Christine + Anne Fields71151% games−2.9% vs expected
Lisa Jablon + Pamela M Barbon3350% games−3.3% vs expected
Lisa Jablon + Daniele Ouellet4547% games−4.7% vs expected
Pamela M Barbon + Tina Test3257% games−5.4% vs expected
Lisa Jablon + Brenda Weckerly5849% games−6.4% vs expected
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.

4.5
Carol Greenberg
44W–22L career · 1 line in 2024
18%82%<1%
4.13
4
Anne Russell
169W–78L career · 3 lines in 2024
1%84%15%
3.86
4
Lisa Jablon
43W–37L career · 5 lines in 2024
6%92%2%
3.72
4
Tina Test
76W–67L career · 3 lines in 2024
12%88%1%
3.67
4
Amy Christine
47W–34L career · 3 lines in 2024
13%86%1%
3.66
Pamela M Barbon
28W–27L career · 3 lines in 2024
14%85%1%
3.65
4
Daniele Ouellet
25W–31L career · 3 lines in 2024
20%80%<1%
3.62
4
Christine Fitzpatrick
58W–45L career · 3 lines in 2024
60%40%<1%
3.46
Jacqueline Powell
18W–27L career · 1 line in 2024
78%22%<1%
3.39
Sharon Bartle
132W–107L career · no lines in 2024
<1%80%20%
3.38
Michelle Avery
22W–21L career · 3 lines in 2024
97%3%<1%
3.23
3.5
Aileen Wetton-Garofalo
33W–35L career · 1 line in 2024
5%92%3%
3.23
3.5
Brenda Weckerly
165W–217L career · 3 lines in 2024
12%87%1%
3.17
3.5
Anne Fields
26W–40L career · 4 lines in 2024
14%86%1%
3.15

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.