Teams

Lee - CCNC

2025 Sandhills Tri Level 18 & over · 3.0

14 players · average NTRP 3.70 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-07-17Lost 01
L#2 DoublesShannon Allison / Sarah McAdams vs Julia McDonald / Meredith Weinstein3-6, 6-4, 0-1
2025-06-26Lost 01
L#2 DoublesSarah McAdams / Michele Keel vs Sandra Jones / Yuko Resseguie2-6, 0-6
2025-06-23Won 10
W#2 DoublesSarah McAdams / Shannon Allison vs Annmarie Anderson / Carolyn Voltz6-4, 6-3
2025-05-22Lost 01
L#2 DoublesShannon Allison / Sarah McAdams vs Katherine Armstrong / Jessica Kouba4-6, 2-6
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 3.0 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 3.29 estimated across 12 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.

Christy Clark
published 4.5
3.89
Robin McClymont
published
3.63
Katherine Melvin
published
3.62
Christina Powers
published 4
3.54
Mary Hannah Vaughan
published
3.51
Heidi Stevens
published
3.50
Shannon Allison
published
3.43
Caroline Parks
published 3.5
3.04
Sarah McAdams
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.94
Murtis Worth
published
2.91
Jennifer Fincher
published
2.77
Meagan Lee
published
2.67
Michele Keel
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.

Christy Clark + Robin McClymont4645% gamesnot enough data
Mary Hannah Vaughan + Robin McClymont7354% gamesnot enough data
Katherine Melvin + Christy Clark5260% gamesnot enough data
Katherine Melvin + Christina Powers2449% gamesnot enough data
Katherine Melvin + Mary Hannah Vaughan2338% gamesnot enough data
Christy Clark + Shannon Allison4156% gamesnot enough data
Shannon Allison + Christina Powers4154% gamesnot enough data
Mary Hannah Vaughan + Christina Powers2340% gamesnot 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.

4.5
Christy Clark
48W–29L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Robin McClymont
53W–34L career · no lines in 2025
<1%78%22%
3.89
Katherine Melvin
19W–14L career · no lines in 2025
18%81%<1%
3.63
4
Christina Powers
31W–41L career · no lines in 2025
21%79%<1%
3.62
Mary Hannah Vaughan
29W–27L career · no lines in 2025
39%61%<1%
3.54
Heidi Stevens
16W–40L career · no lines in 2025
47%53%<1%
3.51
Shannon Allison
31W–16L career · no lines in 2025
<1%49%51%
3.50
3.5
Caroline Parks
33W–12L career · no lines in 2025
<1%69%31%
3.43
3.5
Sarah McAdams
25W–38L career · 4 lines in 2025
39%61%<1%
3.04
Murtis Worth
15W–16L career · no lines in 2025
<1%67%33%
2.94
Jennifer Fincher
18W–26L career · no lines in 2025
73%27%<1%
2.91
Meagan Lee
12W–17L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
3
Catherine Robinette
12W–8L career · no lines in 2025
11%88%1%
2.67
Michele Keel
11W–12L 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.