Displaying 1 - 25 of 306

 Entry ID Region First Last APPL Index Appeal To Workflow Status Workflow Step Internal Review Notes Reject Reason
19360West ValleyLoriJuscius2.52.5ApprovedWorkflow Complete
18753West ValleyNatalieBoles2.262.5ApprovedWorkflow Complete
  • Duplicate Appeal
19590East ValleyDonnaRutledge3.02.5RejectedWorkflow Complete

Deny
3.0 to 2.5
Dominated at 2.5
Averaged 10 ppg
Won almost 75% of games
Won state tournament at 2.5

  • Information provided does not support the Appeal
  • APPL history of results does not support the Appeal
18238East ValleySherylErickson3.002.5ApprovedWorkflow Complete

APPROVE
Her index is 2.72 and originally appealed as her team was thinking about playing 3.0. She was basically the guinea pig to see if they could get appeals....Then the team decided to stay at 2.5 "after" she had appealed.
18722West ValleyNatalieBoles2.262.5ApprovedWorkflow Complete
18723West ValleyNatalieBoles2.262.5ApprovedWorkflow Complete
18715West ValleyLynneAiken2.332.5ApprovedWorkflow Complete
17850East ValleyFemmeSessions3.12.5ApprovedWorkflow Complete

YES APPROVE APPEAL Greg M agrees

75 yr old playing 65+ wants to go TO 2.5 from 3.1.
DID NOT dominate @2.5
LOST majority of games @ 2.5 and split a few @ 2.5
12 :12
Femme is where she need to be
17990East ValleyGeriLuciani2.753.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete

APPROVE to 3.0
HOVERING AT 3.99 2025
Last 4 games 2.93 to
2.79 just the last 4 games
263 won 246 lost
50% win/loss
19299West ValleyPhyllisHubatch3.683.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete
19036West ValleyZOECOPENHAVER2.993.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete

Good w/L record
17786West ValleyLeslieKnutson3.503.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete
17872West ValleyJeanDenslow3.543.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete
18316East ValleyLynnJones3.53.0RejectedWorkflow Complete

REJECT

Index 3.59
Won 43 Lost 11
80% Win
554won 282lost
9.88 ppg average

  • Information provided does not support the Appeal
  • APPL history of results does not support the Appeal
17794SouthernNancyCuzman2.823.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete

Nancy has been a solid 3.0 player for several years. As a coach/captain, Nancy ends up playing with the players no one else wants to play with. Nancy has a good well rounded game. She dinks, can do overheads and thinks about strategy. Nancy is very slightly built and I believe her lack of strength is the only thing that keeps her from being a 3.5 player. I would approve Nancy's appeal as she has done the work to be a 3.0 but constantly puts others first. Her average rating this past year is 2.917 which is well within the auto appeal boundaries.
18126West ValleyMikiDammarell2.963.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete

Won 73%
Dominated 2.5

Approve
17820West ValleyBarbaraSchriber3.513.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete
18287SouthernSueLinton3.573.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete

Sue is a 3.57 player who is asking to play down to a 3.0. She is 75 years old and wants to play doubles with her husband who is a 3.0 and is 82 years old. She was quite sick this past spring and has had a hard time recovering.

Sue and her husband played together last year in 30 games. They won 22 and lost 8. They gained 6 Appl points and allowed 12.

Sue's rating bobbed around all year going between the 3.37 she started with and peaked for one game at 3.6 before going back to a 3.55. While she was over 3.5 most of the season it was usually 3.51, 3.55.... she only hit 3.6 at one time and only for one game of one match.

While her husband COULD play up on a 3.5 team due to his age, his ratings are continuously low 3.2.

with that being said, is she better than 3.0 yes, at 75 playing a a 65+ should that give her some grace when she plays with an 82 year old partner.....

My feelings are if they are husband and wife and can even stand to play together on the same side.... they must be amazing people. I would vote yes based on age. But I realize I am pretty tenderhearted when it come to things like this.

19098West ValleySherryHarleman3.583.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete

w 3, l- 18
had surgery
2025 first year, probably should have started at 3.0
17859East ValleyAJStroud3.623.0RejectedWorkflow Complete

REJECT APPEAL

Both AJ and her partner Jen Dale did well at 3.5
Just because her partner did not move up to 3.5 is not a reason to play 18+ @ 3.0.
I would suggest Jen do an appeal to 3.5 if they want to continue to play together. Jen's current rating is 3.42 and could easily get an appeal to 3.5.
These two would DOMINATE at 3.0.

  • Information provided does not support the Appeal
  • APPL history of results does not support the Appeal
18822West ValleyCatherine (Cati)Ackley2.973.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete

first year was 2025
w 24 losses 10
high point scores on losses to add to team totals
17880SouthernSuzanneRichards2.83.0RejectedWorkflow Complete

suzanne started at the given rate of 3.2 and ended at 2.8. Her rating progressed steadily downward.
Mixed play
6 wins 18 losses
appl points scored 5 appl points allowed 1
womens
5 wins 13 losses
appl points scored 7 appl points allowed
The suzanne richards that is 72 as our appl states does not have a pb brackets rating. Her dupr is 2.943 which comes only from a ladder league within her community and no tournament play

she states she has rotator cuff issues.
I don't recommend approval

  • Duplicate Appeal
17960East ValleyDonnaVarnell2.973.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete
  • Duplicate Appeal
19640West ValleyDianeSantos3.563.0ApprovedWorkflow Complete

Medical

Did not play in 2025
18125West ValleyTrynnaJohnson2.783.0RejectedWorkflow Complete
  • APPL history of results does not support the Appeal
 Entry ID Region First Last APPL Index Appeal To Workflow Status Workflow Step Internal Review Notes Reject Reason