Teams

OP-Conekin In it to win it 55s 3.0W S

2025 Neuse River Singles 55 & over · 3.0 Women 55 & over

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-03-09vs GCC-Dempsey 55s 3.0W SWon 20
W#1 SinglesKatherine James vs Dannie Moss6-1, 6-1
W#2 SinglesKathryn Custer vs Mary Jane Thomassen6-3, 6-2
2025-03-02vs GCC-Dempsey 55s 3.0W SWon 21
W#1 SinglesLulu Conekin vs Nicole Carlyle6-0, 6-2
W#2 SinglesLori Baker vs Jenny Dempsey6-0, 6-0
L#3 SinglesTammie Hudspeth vs Kellye Roberts3-6, 1-6
2025-02-09vs GCC-Dempsey 55s 3.0W SWon 20
W#1 SinglesAnn Game vs Amy Moye6-1, 6-1
W#3 SinglesLori Baker vs Mary Jane Thomassen6-2, 6-3
2025-02-02vs GCC-Dempsey 55s 3.0W SWon 20
W#1 SinglesKatherine James vs Jenny Dempsey6-0, 6-1
W#2 SinglesAnnita Best vs Dannie Moss6-0, 6-0
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 3.0 Women 55 & over 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 2.86 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.

3.12
Katherine James
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.08
Annita Best
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
3.00
Susan Hardison
published
2.93
Kathryn Custer
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
2.87
Lulu Conekin
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.75
Ann Game
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
2.67
Lori Baker
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
2.49
Tammie Hudspeth
usually #3 Singles 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.

Susan Hardison + Annita Best9176% games+12.0% vs expected
Susan Hardison + Katherine James404 matchesnot enough data
Susan Hardison + Lulu Conekin404 matchesnot enough data
Susan Hardison + Kathryn Custer213 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.

Katherine James
18W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
18%81%<1%
3.12
3
Annita Best
30W–8L career · type A · 1 line in 2025
<1%26%74%
3.08
Susan Hardison
33W–9L career · no lines in 2025
<1%50%50%
3.00
Kathryn Custer
13W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%71%28%
2.93
Lulu Conekin
22W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%84%16%
2.87
3
Ann Game
13W–28L career · 1 line in 2025
3%95%3%
2.75
Lori Baker
26W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
10%89%1%
2.67
Tammie Hudspeth
13W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
53%47%<1%
2.49

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.