Teams

Great Gets

Spring Adult 65 & Over Doubles · 6.0 Women 65s

11 players · average NTRP 2.83 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-06-14vs Sun setsLost 12
L#1 DoublesCelia Youngren / Janet Wargo vs Cindy Forson / Sue Sammons3-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesVirginia Hatch / Debra Alpern vs Margaret Manley / Janet Groner6-2, 6-0
L#3 DoublesMarcie Merrell / Ellen Wahlers vs Kathy Mcwhorter / Nancy Guggenbickler2-6, 6-7
2026-06-07vs Sun setsLost 12
W#1 DoublesLynette Doughty / Linda Warner vs Sally Aveni / Cindy Forson6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCelia Youngren / Ellen Wahlers vs Jacqueline Davis / Kathy Mcwhorter3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJanet Wargo / Martha Ware vs Eglia Flores / Janet Groner6-7, 1-6
2026-05-31vs Sun setsLost 03
L#1 DoublesLynette Doughty / Celia Youngren vs Cindy Forson / Sue Sammons6-7, 4-6
L#2 DoublesVirginia Hatch / Debra Alpern vs Margaret Manley / Sally Aveni6-1, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMartha Ware / Janet Arnold vs Kathy Mcwhorter / Jacqueline Davis4-6, 3-6
2026-05-17vs Sun setsLost 12
W#1 DoublesCelia Youngren / Linda Warner vs Jacqueline Davis / Kathy Mcwhorter7-5, 6-2
L#2 DoublesSheri Gallo / Janet Arnold vs Sue Sammons / Cindy Forson5-7, 1-6
L#3 DoublesLynette Doughty / Janet Wargo vs Sally Aveni / Eglia Flores6-4, 5-7, 0-1
2026-05-08vs Sun setsWon 21
L#1 DoublesSheri Gallo / Janet Arnold vs Diana Coggin / Jacqueline Davis5-7, 5-7
W#2 DoublesVirginia Hatch / Debra Alpern vs Sally Aveni / Pam Helge6-3, 0-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCelia Youngren / Linda Warner vs Cindy Forson / Margaret Manley6-4, 7-5
2026-05-03vs Sun setsLost 12
W#1 DoublesCelia Youngren / Janet Arnold vs Cindy Forson / Nancy Guggenbickler6-3, 7-6
L#2 DoublesCharlsa Bentley / Lynette Doughty vs Diana Coggin / Jacqueline Davis6-4, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesEllen Wahlers / Marcie Merrell vs Sally Aveni / Pam Helge0-6, 2-6
2026-04-26vs Sun setsLost 03
L#1 DoublesMarcie Merrell / Martha Ware vs Sally Aveni / Pam Helge1-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesCharlsa Bentley / Janet Wargo vs Jacqueline Davis / Diana Coggin2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesDebra Alpern / Virginia Hatch vs Cindy Forson / Sue Sammons4-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-04-19vs Sun setsWon 30
W#1 DoublesSheri Gallo / Janet Arnold vs Cindy Forson / Sue Sammons6-4, 7-6
W#2 DoublesCharlsa Bentley / Lynette Doughty vs Margaret Manley / Sally Aveni7-5, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLinda Warner / Celia Youngren vs Janet Groner / Pam Helge7-6, 7-5
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 standings2 teams · 6.0 Women 65s
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Sun sets6215922215
2Great Gets2691533257

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 2.71 estimated across 5 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.

2.80
Charlsa Bentley
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.79
Celia Youngren
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.77
Linda Warner
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published
2.61
Debra Alpern
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
2.60
Martha Ware
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Ellen Wahlers
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Janet Arnold
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Janet Wargo
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Lynette Doughty
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Marcie Merrell
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Sheri Gallo
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Charlsa Bentley + Janet Wargo7650% games−5.1% vs expected
Janet Arnold + Sheri Gallo2344% gamesnot enough data
Marcie Merrell + Ellen Wahlers044 matchesnot enough data
Lynette Doughty + Janet Wargo134 matchesnot enough data
Lynette Doughty + Celia Youngren134 matchesnot enough data
Linda Warner + Celia Youngren404 matchesnot enough data
Janet Wargo + Celia Youngren224 matchesnot enough data
Lynette Doughty + Charlsa Bentley213 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.

3
Charlsa Bentley
15W–12L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.80
3
Celia Youngren
22W–43L career · 7 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.79
Linda Warner
34W–31L career · 7 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.77
2.5
Debra Alpern
5W–15L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%21%79%
2.61
Martha Ware
27W–41L career · 3 lines in 2026
24%76%<1%
2.60
Ellen Wahlers
3W–20L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Janet Arnold
4W–4L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Janet Wargo
12W–20L career · 4 lines in 2026
not enough data
Lynette Doughty
7W–19L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Marcie Merrell
6W–26L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sheri Gallo
33W–41L career · 3 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.