Teams

Blevins TOCC

2025 Mixed 18 & Over-GC · 3.5 Mixed

14 players · average NTRP 3.38 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-07-10vs OSTC Adamo 18+ 7.0 MixedSplit 11
L#1 DoublesBrendon Confer / Hannah Hults vs Rick Liebig / Delynsi Che5-7, 4-6
W#2 DoublesLee Gabardi / Taylor Pilger vs Sean Perkins / Chantelle Lopez Parker6-3, 6-7, 1-0
2025-05-21vs BBTC - WardLost 03
L#1 DoublesRichard Mattiace / Hannah Hults vs Todd Bradford / Dena Karr2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesReuben Byrd / Lynsie Battles vs Ellen Taylor / Nick McGuffee6-2, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesKelly Pilger / David Pilger vs Jeffrey Ward / Paulette Dawkins2-6, 3-6
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 Mixed 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 3.13 estimated across 10 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.

3.47
Jennifer Maisano
published
3.38
Lynsie Battles
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.37
Brendon Confer
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
David Pilger
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Hannah Hults
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.18
Kara Blevins
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
3.18
Reuben Byrd
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.07
Lee Gabardi
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.99
Richard Mattiace
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.99
Kelly Pilger
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
2.88
Taylor Pilger
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.81
George Huffman
published 3
Joey Dahl
published
Lauren Mattiace
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.

Joey Dahl + Jennifer Maisano4452% games+2.5% vs expected
Lynsie Battles + Reuben Byrd0537% gamesnot enough data
Kara Blevins + Lee Gabardi303 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.

Jennifer Maisano
68W–49L career · no lines in 2025
<1%59%41%
3.47
Lynsie Battles
45W–15L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.38
3.5
Brendon Confer
27W–27L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%84%16%
3.37
3.5
David Pilger
6W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Hannah Hults
24W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kara Blevins
84W–54L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%8%92%
3.18
Reuben Byrd
52W–112L career · 2 lines in 2025
9%91%1%
3.18
Lee Gabardi
42W–28L career · 4 lines in 2025
29%71%<1%
3.07
Richard Mattiace
11W–22L career · 1 line in 2025
52%48%<1%
2.99
Kelly Pilger
53W–45L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%54%46%
2.99
Taylor Pilger
16W–19L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%82%18%
2.88
3
George Huffman
7W–5L career · no lines in 2025
1%91%8%
2.81
Joey Dahl
27W–63L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Lauren Mattiace
9W–7L 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.