Teams

TCU WEIS

2025 FW Ladies 55 & Over winter · Fri 6.0 Ladies

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / TEXAS

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-01-31vs ATC BLAHA/SMITHLost 12
W#1 DoublesJo Anne Golaz / Pet Guerra vs JULIE PARKE / Beth Haugh6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesLeah Ann Neal / Mary Rogers vs Joy Blaha / Jennifer Cottraux2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesPatricia Fiering / Della Weis vs Tiffany Smith / Lynne Byars2-6, 0-6
2025-01-15vs MCL HOCHSTERLost 12
W#1 DoublesPet Guerra / Susie Gilinsky vs Linda Hochster / Laura Schrengohst6-4, 6-3
L#2 DoublesLeah Ann Neal / Patricia Fiering vs Judy Hulsey / Christi Handy3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesDella Weis / Mary Rogers vs Anne Ferguson / LINDA FEATHERSTONE2-6, 4-6
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 Fri 6.0 Ladies 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 2.76 estimated across 3 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.

3.06
Pet Guerra
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.63
Jo Anne Golaz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.58
Della Weis
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Kathleen Calder
published
Leah Ann Neal
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Mary Rogers
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Patricia Fiering
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Patti Hebson
published
Susie Gilinsky
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Pet Guerra + Della Weis5254% gamesnot enough data
Pet Guerra + Jo Anne Golaz224 matchesnot enough data
Mary Rogers + Patti Hebson044 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.

Pet Guerra
22W–11L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%34%66%
3.06
Jo Anne Golaz
23W–46L career · 1 line in 2025
17%82%<1%
2.63
3
Della Weis
5W–7L career · type A · 2 lines in 2025
29%71%<1%
2.58
Kathleen Calder
2W–8L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Leah Ann Neal
9W–19L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary Rogers
2W–8L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Patricia Fiering
4W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Patti Hebson
1W–12L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Susie Gilinsky
7W–4L career · 1 line 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.