Teams

Stonehenge Snavely

2026 Richmond Adult 55 & Over Weekday Women · Richmond Adult 55 & Over Weekday 7.0 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.17 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-08-07vs Raintree Stahling - YLost 02
L#1 DoublesTerri Estes / Patricia Riester vs Karen Wood / Rebecca Schwartz6-7, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesDonna Bull / Jane Shives vs Mona Stahling / Lisa Penny2-6, 3-6
2026-07-27vs Raintree EvansLost 03
L#1 DoublesTerri Estes / Donna Bull vs Catherine Fallin / Lisa Harmon0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJane Shives / Betty Snavely vs Suzanne Martin / Lorraine McGehee1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesBetsy Goodreau / Victoria Jordan vs Shannon Foster / Teresa Lancaster0-6, 4-6
2026-07-20vs Westwood 55 Ladies - GilmanLost 03
L#1 DoublesTerri Estes / Patricia Riester vs SanDee Gammon / Donna Bearman2-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesAnn Falk / Susan Burns vs Karen Viverette / Colleen Quinn2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesDebbie Fausey / Donna Bull vs Renee Gilman / Elizabeth Boutry6-3, 6-7, 0-1
2026-07-13vs ACAC NeumannLost 12
W#1 DoublesPatricia Riester / Terri Estes vs Beth Farnsworth / Diane Linderman6-4, 6-1
L#2 DoublesSusan Burns / Donna Bull vs Carol Hoefer / Virginia Nelson4-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesBetsy Goodreau / Ann Falk vs Judy Duke / Hilary Brodsky3-6, 3-6
2026-07-06vs Townsend 55+ 7.0 wkDAYLost 03
L#1 DoublesDonna Bull / Patricia Riester vs Sandra Holahan / Katherine Guerette6-3, 2-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesSusan Burns / Ann Falk vs Anne Townsend / Janet Pommersheim2-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesTerri Estes / Debbie Fausey vs Kimberl Hale / Theresa Bartholomew6-7, 0-6
2026-06-22vs Dominion Club - LongLost 03
L#1 DoublesTerri Estes / Donna Bull vs Heidi Collier / Susan Long2-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesJane Shives / Ann Falk vs Stephanie Marcus / Michele Limoges0-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesDebbie Fausey / Betty Snavely vs Nathalie Stephens / Annette Vignone1-6, 0-6
2026-06-17vs Salisbury KimLost 03
L#1 DoublesDonna Bull / Susan Burns vs Marianne Lane / Robin Sorensen4-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesTerri Estes / Jane Shives vs Stacey Piotrowski / Virginia Totaro5-7, 6-2, 0-1
L#3 DoublesDebbie Fausey / Betsy Goodreau vs Cheryl Cacciotti / Zoe Emerson1-6, 1-6
2026-06-15vs Hermitage - HarcumLost 12
W#1 DoublesSusan Burns / Donna Bull vs Beth Stinson / Judi Baker6-3, 2-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesTerri Estes / Jane Shives vs Teki Hall / Kathy Harcum3-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesDebra Berry / Victoria Jordan vs Virginia Berents / Cheryl Law0-6, 1-6
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 standings13 teams · Richmond Adult 55 & Over Weekday 7.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1ACAC~Lockhart7119514166
2Westwood 55 Ladies - Gilman7117717183
3Dominion Club - Long6216820182
4Hermitage - Harcum6216821187
5Townsend 55+ 7.0 wkDAY5316823209
6Avalon Davis53141023222
7Raintree Evans44141023203
8Salisbury Kim44131124208
9Burkwood MooreFun35111330230
10MTC Downing 7.02691532233
11ACAC Neumann2651939268
12Raintree Stahling - Y1732143263
13Stonehenge Snavely0832143261

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 2.77 estimated across 8 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.

3.54
Patricia Riester
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
2.88
Terri Estes
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.85
Donna Bull
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Debra Berry
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.70
Ann Falk
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.67
Debbie Fausey
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.65
Jane Shives
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.46
Betty Snavely
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.44
Betsy Goodreau
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Victoria Jordan
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 30% · 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.

Donna Bull + Terri Estes1636% games−14.9% vs expected
Betsy Goodreau + Victoria Jordan044 matchesnot enough data
Patricia Riester + Terri Estes123 matchesnot enough data
Terri Estes + Ann Falk123 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
Patricia Riester
42W–47L career · 4 lines in 2026
39%61%<1%
3.54
Terri Estes
3W–14L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
2.88
Donna Bull
4W–11L career · 8 lines in 2026
1%86%14%
2.85
3
Debra Berry
0W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
3
Ann Falk
4W–6L career · 4 lines in 2026
8%91%2%
2.70
3
Debbie Fausey
1W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
2.67
Jane Shives
1W–8L career · 5 lines in 2026
15%85%1%
2.65
3
Betty Snavely
0W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
62%38%<1%
2.46
3
Betsy Goodreau
0W–11L career · 6 lines in 2026
66%34%<1%
2.44
Victoria Jordan
2W–12L career · 10 lines in 2026
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.