Teams

WOCC Stringer / Moehling

2022 Richmond Adult 40 & Over Weekday · Richmond Adult 40 & Over 3.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.70 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2022-07-22vs MTC HilbertLost 01
L#1 DoublesDarlene Moehling / Sandy Pisano vs Kati Shick / Erin Euen4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2022-07-15Won 10
W#1 SinglesYancey Haas vs Kellie Banton6-0, 6-0
2022-07-08vs Stonehenge BullWon 10
W#1 DoublesDarlene Moehling / Sandy Pisano vs Donna Bull / Terri Estes7-6, 6-2
2022-07-06vs Raintree EvansWon 10
W#1 DoublesYancey Haas / Darlene Moehling vs Karen Wood / Kathryn Darling6-2, 6-4
2022-07-01vs ACAC GueretteSplit 11
W#1 DoublesDarlene Moehling / Elizabeth Boyle vs Valerie Stephens / Paula Bissett6-3, 6-1
L#1 SinglesYancey Haas vs Christina Aeinan Kang6-3, 0-6, 0-1
2022-06-29vs TDC SpillareSplit 11
W#1 DoublesDarlene Moehling / Elizabeth Garnett vs Denise Shafer / Rhonda Underwood6-4, 6-2
L#1 SinglesYancey Haas vs Lauren Duke6-7, 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 Richmond Adult 40 & Over 3.5 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 3.32 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.

3.88
Darlene Moehling
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.73
Yancey Haas
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.37
Cheri Stringer
published 3.5
3.21
Kelly Gregory
published
3.19
Elizabeth Garnett
published 3.5
3.10
Jenefer Williams
published
3.10
Anne-Marie Anderson
published 3.5
3.00
Sandy Pisano
published
Liz Benedetti
published
Meda Lane
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.

Yancey Haas + Darlene Moehling5157% gamesnot enough data
Sandy Pisano + Elizabeth Garnett134 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
Darlene Moehling
113W–77L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%81%19%
3.88
4
Yancey Haas
166W–100L career · 4 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.73
3.5
Cheri Stringer
9W–6L career · no lines in 2022
<1%84%16%
3.37
Kelly Gregory
13W–15L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.21
3.5
Elizabeth Garnett
8W–10L career · no lines in 2022
8%92%1%
3.19
Jenefer Williams
7W–11L career · no lines in 2022
21%79%<1%
3.10
3.5
Anne-Marie Anderson
3W–4L career · no lines in 2022
22%78%<1%
3.10
Sandy Pisano
4W–5L career · no lines in 2022
49%51%<1%
3.00
Liz Benedetti
2W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Meda Lane
6W–9L career · no lines in 2022
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.