Teams

Dickson/Worrell/LRAC

2025 Combo 55 & Over 7.5 · 7.5 Women

12 players · average NTRP 4.00 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-10-19vs Oates/Fike/Rville/BPLost 12
L#1 DoublesKathleen Porteus / Synchai Walls vs Melissa Riddle / Heather Mainord3-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMary Leigh Burnette / Lisa Breeding vs Lissa Symancyk / Katie Staggs6-4, 6-4
L#3 DoublesMaureen Dickson / Margaret Hicks vs Melissa Oates / Wendy Hannah5-7, 7-6, 1-0
2025-09-15vs Oates/Fike/Rville/BPWon 30
W#1 DoublesChristy Bray / Kim Worrell vs Milli Stanley / Michele Stearns6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesKathleen Porteus / Joy Randell vs JoeAnn Ashby / Rebecca Kinworthy7-6, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMargaret Hicks / Mary Beth Munro vs Margaret Hoskyn / Wendy Hannah6-3, 1-6, 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 standings for 7.5 Women 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 3.53 estimated across 12 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.

3.82
Christy Bray
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.81
Kim Baker
published
3.78
Sheffield Duke
published
3.72
Mary Leigh Burnette
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.64
Marti Henson
published
3.60
Kathleen Porteus
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.48
Joy Randell
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.37
Mary Beth Munro
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.37
Synchai Walls
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.33
Kim Worrell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.24
Maureen Dickson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.15
Lisa Breeding
usually #2 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.

Kim Worrell + Mary Beth Munro2354% games−3.2% vs expected
Joy Randell + Marti Henson3253% gamesnot enough data
Kim Worrell + Maureen Dickson123 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
Christy Bray
16W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
1%89%10%
3.82
Kim Baker
26W–6L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.81
Sheffield Duke
6W–4L career · no lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.78
Mary Leigh Burnette
13W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
6%92%2%
3.72
Marti Henson
15W–10L career · no lines in 2025
16%84%1%
3.64
Kathleen Porteus
8W–4L career · 2 lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
3.60
Joy Randell
25W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%55%45%
3.48
Mary Beth Munro
17W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%82%17%
3.37
Synchai Walls
7W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.37
Kim Worrell
32W–22L career · 1 line in 2025
1%87%12%
3.33
Maureen Dickson
8W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
5%92%3%
3.24
Lisa Breeding
15W–21L career · 1 line in 2025
14%85%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.