Teams

BC-Hancock

2025 Adult 40 & Over · 3.5 Women

20 players · average NTRP 3.53 / NORTHWEST WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2025-03-15vs BETC-HollarLost 13
L#1 DoublesDebbie McAllister / Nancy Burlingame vs Andrea Escame-Hedger / Jolene Rhodes6-7, 4-6
L#1 SinglesLeigh Staddon-Smith vs Amy Yamamoto6-4, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJill Hancock / Julie Moran vs Vivian Jackson / Annabelle Lucena4-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesNancy Porter / YoungHae Chu vs Rebecca Mann / Nona Allison6-1, 6-4
2025-03-09vs RBW-Group Therapy 3.5-WilkinsWon 40
W#1 DoublesJulie Moran / Shera Myers vs May-Jun Chao / Lana Johnson7-6, 5-1
W#1 SinglesLaurie Jacobson vs Anahit Sukhudyan4-6, 6-0, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJill Hancock / Janet Yingling vs Mihaela Olariu Ureche / Shannen Wyman7-5, 5-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesNancy Burlingame / YoungHae Chu vs Kimberly Wong / Yuki Omori6-3, 6-4
2025-03-01vs MI-Crush It-LeeLost 13
L#1 DoublesKatherine Walker / Jennifer Johnson vs CECI BISSONNETTE / Maile Intrachat2-6, 5-7
L#1 SinglesJanet Yingling vs Sella Subramanian0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJill Hancock / Claudia Huzar vs Lyndsey Gillis / Susan Kim3-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesNancy Porter / Leigh Staddon-Smith vs Katie Corey / Elizabeth Evans2-6, 6-4, 1-0
2025-02-14vs ETC-What's the Score? HeenanWon 31
W#1 DoublesJennifer Shields / Shera Myers vs Heather Waters / Ursula Heenan6-3, 6-4
L#1 SinglesJanet Yingling vs Proshat Parsimoghadam3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesClaudia Huzar / Jill Hancock vs Sarah Yoon / Lynn Casey3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesNancy Porter / YoungHae Chu vs Ginny Larsen / Michelle Calquhoun3-6, 7-5, 1-0
2025-02-08vs AYTC-BALLERS-NisetSplit 22
W#1 DoublesAnna Graves / Claudia Huzar vs Ling Wu / KC Mattingly-Nelson7-5, 2-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesNancy Porter vs PeiPei Sung6-4, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJennifer Johnson / Katherine Walker vs Christa Eadson / Mila Niset6-3, 1-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJulie Moran / Jill Hancock vs Katrina Miller / Eunji Fuller6-1, 6-2
2025-02-01vs AYTC-Slice Girls-Cowden-TempletonLost 13
L#1 DoublesKatherine Walker / Janet Yingling vs Deirdre Cowden-Templeton / Kelly Thompson1-6, 6-7
L#1 SinglesNicole Hill vs Kim Li Eng3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesAnna Graves / Claudia Huzar vs Lori Beehner / Shawli Hathaway4-6, 6-6
W#3 DoublesJennifer Shields / Ann Imus vs Jennie Cecil-Moore / Cynthia Padilla4-6, 6-1
2025-01-24vs EDG-Net Ninjas-KoskiWon 40
W#1 DoublesClaudia Huzar / Katherine Walker vs Qi Geng / Laura Rochford7-6, 6-4
W#1 SinglesLaurie Jacobson vs Elizaveta Hermann6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesShera Myers / Nancy Burlingame vs Carmen Pong / Nelly Ketefian6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesLeigh Staddon-Smith / Julie Moran vs Phyllis Gill / Amy Higgins6-2, 6-4
2025-01-19vs WSC-Buck Wild WhitneySplit 22
W#1 DoublesAnna Graves / Claudia Huzar vs Christine Boyle / Savitha Krammer7-6, 6-1
L#1 SinglesLaurie Jacobson vs Sarah Pistone1-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesShera Myers / Jill Hancock vs Lyrma Santodomingo / Tomoe Tawara2-6, 6-7
W#3 DoublesDebbie McAllister / Dana Landry vs Asawari Chingale / Cathleen Summers6-1, 6-2
2025-01-11vs NTC-ZimbelmanLost 13
W#1 DoublesKatherine Walker / Jennifer Johnson vs Janice Merlino / Katie Jergens7-5, 6-6
L#1 SinglesNicole Hill vs Lori Clithero1-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesNancy Burlingame / Dana Landry vs Amy Zimbelman / Beth Rossi2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesJanet Yingling / Ann Imus vs Chardie Byrne / Jennifer Meisner3-6, 7-5, 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 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 3.28 estimated across 18 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.

3.75
Michelle Watson
published 4
3.45
Anna Graves
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.45
Dana Landry
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.44
Ann Imus
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.42
Nancy Burlingame
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.34
Shera Myers
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.34
Claudia Huzar
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.31
Debbie McAllister
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.29
Jennifer Shields
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
YoungHae Chu
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.25
Nancy Porter
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.23
Nicole Hill
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.22
Katherine Walker
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.20
Jill Hancock
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.20
Janet Yingling
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #3 Doubles 14% · published 3.5
3.13
Laurie Jacobson
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.09
Leigh Staddon-Smith
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.05
Susan Hurt
published 3.5
2.86
Julie Moran
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Jennifer Johnson
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.

Julie Moran + Jill Hancock4157% games+8.0% vs expected
Anna Graves + Claudia Huzar181158% games+7.7% vs expected
Nancy Burlingame + Jennifer Shields4256% games+5.8% vs expected
Susan Hurt + Jill Hancock7359% games+3.9% vs expected
Katherine Walker + Janet Yingling8457% games+2.1% vs expected
Debbie McAllister + Jennifer Shields11656% games+1.9% vs expected
Katherine Walker + Jennifer Johnson9455% games+1.6% vs expected
YoungHae Chu + Janet Yingling2447% games+1.1% vs expected
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
Michelle Watson
49W–44L career · no lines in 2025
4%93%3%
3.75
3.5
Anna Graves
103W–45L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%63%37%
3.45
3.5
Dana Landry
93W–84L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%64%36%
3.45
3.5
Ann Imus
79W–67L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%65%34%
3.44
3.5
Nancy Burlingame
45W–21L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%73%27%
3.42
3.5
Shera Myers
176W–93L career · 6 lines in 2025
1%86%13%
3.34
3.5
Claudia Huzar
58W–47L career · 8 lines in 2025
1%87%12%
3.34
3.5
Debbie McAllister
47W–37L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.31
3.5
Jennifer Shields
53W–37L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.29
3.5
YoungHae Chu
32W–37L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Nancy Porter
79W–41L career · 4 lines in 2025
4%93%4%
3.25
3.5
Nicole Hill
71W–88L career · 6 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.23
3.5
Katherine Walker
44W–35L career · 5 lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Jill Hancock
142W–94L career · 6 lines in 2025
8%91%2%
3.20
3.5
Janet Yingling
58W–51L career · 7 lines in 2025
8%91%2%
3.20
Laurie Jacobson
26W–35L career · 3 lines in 2025
18%82%<1%
3.13
3.5
Leigh Staddon-Smith
65W–48L career · 3 lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.09
3.5
Susan Hurt
60W–33L career · no lines in 2025
35%65%<1%
3.05
3.5
Julie Moran
57W–48L career · 4 lines in 2025
83%17%<1%
2.86
Jennifer Johnson
30W–15L career · no lines 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.