← Teams

IRV-Logsdon

2023 Adult 55 & Over · 7.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.38 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.13 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.

3.35
Sharon Loomis-Malin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.23
Nina Sanna
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.21
Kelly Norling
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.20
Traci Laurent
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.18
Renee Schwartz
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.14
Colleen Walker
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.97
Heather Selis
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.78
Lori Vranizan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
—
Mary Logsdon
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 0
Results9 ties
2022-12-04Lost 0–1
L#1 DoublesTraci Laurent / Sharon Loomis-Malin vs Trylla Lembke / Lorna Goth6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-12-03Won 1–0
W#1 DoublesTraci Laurent / Sharon Loomis-Malin vs Catherine Leedy / Kim Wright3-6, 6-1, 1-0
2022-11-13Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesTraci Laurent / Sharon Loomis-Malin vs Gale Schmidt / Vera Vos6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMary Logsdon / Wendy Weddle vs Jaymi Sladen / Ella Grant6-2, 7-5
L#3 DoublesColleen Walker / Heather Selis vs Kristi Tompkins / Alice Morris6-2, 6-2
2022-11-05Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesLori Vranizan / Wendy Weddle vs Dayna Jahnke-Corwin / Dalika Crawford7-6, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMary Logsdon / Stacey Burkhart vs Suzanne Casey / Nicolle Lochner6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesTraci Laurent / Nina Sanna vs Anna Maria Savinar / Cathy Koerner6-4, 6-2
2022-10-22Split 1–1
W#2 DoublesStacey Burkhart / Traci Laurent vs Marcie Price / Victoria Rigby6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLori Vranizan / Margo Reifenrath vs Shella Razon-Lumetta / Ruth Semon6-2, 3-6, 1-0
2022-10-09Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesMary Logsdon / Nina Sanna vs Nenette Olson / Maryann Velez6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesKathy Rogers / Heather Selis vs Rochelle Pluymers / Lynn Hendrix6-1, 6-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesKristin Butler / Colleen Walker vs Patricia Nierenberg / Teresa Darling6-2, 6-7, 1-0
2022-10-01Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesSharon Loomis-Malin / Margo Reifenrath vs Catherine Greenblatt / Linda Castaneda6-2, 7-5
W#3 DoublesRenee Schwartz / Chris Farentinos vs Erin Doucet / Valerie Regan6-3, 7-6
2022-09-24Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesTakiyah Williams / Kelly Norling vs Kaie Wellman / Ann Cassin3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesHeather Selis / Stacey Burkhart vs Sandy Swift / Jan Funkhouser2-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKristin Butler / Renee Schwartz vs Bernadette Lisac / Kathy Briscoe6-3, 6-4
2022-09-11Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesSharon Loomis-Malin / Traci Laurent vs Linda Barker / Emily Qi6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesColleen Walker / Susan Hope vs Kathy Ottesen / Judy Potts6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesChris Farentinos / Kelly Norling vs Catherine Lofts / Diane Hardman6-2, 6-2
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.
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.

3.5
Sharon Loomis-Malin
60W–33L career
0%97%3%
3.35
3.5
Nina Sanna
13W–39L career · type S
10%86%4%
3.23
3.5
Kelly Norling
68W–45L career
3%97%0%
3.21
3.5
Traci Laurent
46W–54L career
4%96%0%
3.20
3.5
Renee Schwartz
23W–21L career
5%95%0%
3.18
3.5
Colleen Walker
58W–78L career
9%91%0%
3.14
3
Heather Selis
35W–60L career
0%84%16%
2.97
3
Lori Vranizan
22W–36L career
6%87%7%
2.78
0
Mary Logsdon
32W–21L career
not enough data
—

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.