Teams

Tennis Takes Balls

Winter Adult 18 & Over 2.5 Lone Star · Ladies 2.5

15 players · average NTRP 2.58 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2025-01-11vs Mighty High StrungWon 21
W#1 DoublesCora McAlpine / Kate Polce vs Eileen Bowden / Kate Burns7-5, 6-4
L#2 DoublesCourtney Derby / Jennifer Lauren vs Jaimie Haider / Lisa Idais1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesWendy Funk / Tia Piccolo vs Gabbi Nguyen / Rachael Connelly6-2, 6-4
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 Ladies 2.5 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 2.25 estimated across 15 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.

2.77
Blanca Diaz
published 3
2.46
Shelly Alexander
published
2.45
Sharon Murray
published
2.38
2.32
Kate Polce
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.31
Wendy Funk
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.27
Courtney Derby
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.23
Lynn Currie
published
2.19
Cora McAlpine
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.17
Christie Gonzales
published 2.5
2.13
Tia Piccolo
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.12
Ellie Aiello
published
2.11
Barbara Leahy
published 2.5
1.96
Haley Bullard
published
1.81
Patricia Milushev
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.

Wendy Funk + Kate Polce4354% games+7.2% vs expected
Cora McAlpine + Sharon Murray7064% games+5.4% vs expected
Cora McAlpine + Lynn Currie3740% games−4.0% vs expected
Kate Polce + Courtney Derby3442% gamesnot enough data
Sharon Murray + Kate Polce4154% gamesnot enough data
Cora McAlpine + Kate Polce224 matchesnot enough data
Sharon Murray + Wendy Funk224 matchesnot enough data
Wendy Funk + Courtney Derby224 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
Blanca Diaz
11W–9L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
Shelly Alexander
2W–25L career · no lines in 2025
0%60%40%
2.46
Sharon Murray
25W–38L career · no lines in 2025
0%63%37%
2.45
2.5
Alicia Alvarez Silva
6W–15L career · no lines in 2025
0%81%19%
2.38
Kate Polce
23W–23L career · 1 line in 2025
0%90%10%
2.32
Wendy Funk
16W–32L career · 1 line in 2025
0%91%9%
2.31
2.5
Courtney Derby
10W–14L career · 1 line in 2025
0%95%5%
2.27
Lynn Currie
11W–34L career · no lines in 2025
0%97%3%
2.23
2.5
Cora McAlpine
24W–39L career · 1 line in 2025
0%99%1%
2.19
2.5
Christie Gonzales
7W–15L career · no lines in 2025
0%99%1%
2.17
Tia Piccolo
5W–19L career · 1 line in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.13
Ellie Aiello
3W–3L career · no lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.12
2.5
Barbara Leahy
3W–19L career · no lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.11
Haley Bullard
1W–5L career · no lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
1.96
Patricia Milushev
2W–19L career · no lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
1.81

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.