Teams

MPTC - All In

2025 HTA Spring NA - Ladies Doubles Tuesday · 4.0 Ladies Doubles

17 players · average NTRP 3.88 / TEXAS

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-04-01vs The Woodlands Ridgewood - Serv AcesSplit 11
W#2 DoublesBetty Richmond / Emma Chaney vs Lucy Mendoza-Wells / Angela Arnold6-7, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSoraya Molano / Caroline Noel vs Bettina Samper / Kristi Pickett6-3, 1-6, 0-1
W#1 DoublesRenata Neaton / Emma Chaney vs Katherine Hibbison / Lucy Mendoza-Wells6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesKaren Vuong / Jamie Roberts vs Emily Riggs / Sara Catania6-4, 2-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLinda Flood Chavers / Sheryl Cohen vs Nancy McConnell / Shay Williams6-2, 4-6, 1-0
W#4 DoublesCari Curtis / Veronica Barnhill vs Peili Wu / Martha Sanchez6-2, 6-1
2025-03-18vs MPTC - Trash PandasWon 31
W#1 DoublesLindsey Bradford / Renata Neaton vs Melissa Gonzalez / Cynthia Boase6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesKathryn Baumeister / Kirsten Arnold vs Consuelo Meza / Natalie Diaz2-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesCaroline Noel / Sheryl Cohen vs BONNIE HORTON / Emily Kloppenburg4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#4 DoublesVeronica Barnhill / Cari Curtis vs Barbara Vazquez / Maria Glopil Pasamonte4-6, 7-5, 1-0
2025-02-04vs MPTC - Trash PandasWon 40
W#1 DoublesEmma Chaney / Samantha Russem vs Melissa Gonzalez / Consuelo Meza4-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesLindsey Bradford / Zane Gruznina vs BONNIE HORTON / Maria Glopil Pasamonte5-7, 6-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKaren Vuong / Linda Flood Chavers vs Melissa Garza / Barbara Vazquez6-2, 6-3
W#4 DoublesVeronica Barnhill / Cari Curtis vs Natalie Diaz / Serena Zindler6-1, 6-2
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 4.0 Ladies Doubles 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 3.57 estimated across 17 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.

3.81
Samantha Russem
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.72
Renata Neaton
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.71
Caroline Noel
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.71
Erica Tahtouh
usually #4 Doubles 100% · published
3.69
Emma Chaney
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.64
Lindsey Bradford
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.59
Kirsten Arnold
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.57
Betty Richmond
usually #4 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.55
Kathryn Baumeister
usually #4 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.54
Karen Vuong
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.52
Sheryl Cohen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.50
Veronica Barnhill
usually #4 Doubles 100% · published
3.48
Cherie Hoepfl
published 4
3.43
Zane Gruznina
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.41
Linda Flood Chavers
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.41
Cari Curtis
usually #4 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.38
Soraya Molano
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Renata Neaton + Samantha Russem19863% games+8.1% vs expected
Kathryn Baumeister + Caroline Noel5260% games+6.6% vs expected
Cari Curtis + Veronica Barnhill15761% games+4.7% vs expected
Emma Chaney + Sheryl Cohen4160% gamesnot enough data
Betty Richmond + Kathryn Baumeister2339% gamesnot enough data
Cari Curtis + Kathryn Baumeister404 matchesnot enough data
Lindsey Bradford + Kathryn Baumeister303 matchesnot enough data
Soraya Molano + Veronica Barnhill213 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.

Samantha Russem
71W–26L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%1%99%
3.81
Renata Neaton
92W–36L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
3.72
4
Caroline Noel
12W–3L career · 2 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.71
Erica Tahtouh
31W–26L career · 1 line in 2025
7%91%2%
3.71
Emma Chaney
24W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.69
Lindsey Bradford
25W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%16%84%
3.64
Kirsten Arnold
36W–27L career · 1 line in 2025
27%73%<1%
3.59
4
Betty Richmond
31W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.57
Kathryn Baumeister
35W–32L career · 2 lines in 2025
37%63%<1%
3.55
Karen Vuong
32W–19L career · 2 lines in 2025
39%61%<1%
3.54
Sheryl Cohen
55W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%44%56%
3.52
Veronica Barnhill
47W–51L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%51%49%
3.50
4
Cherie Hoepfl
1W–5L career · type S · no lines in 2025
56%44%<1%
3.48
Zane Gruznina
25W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%69%31%
3.43
Linda Flood Chavers
20W–27L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
3.41
3.5
Cari Curtis
37W–25L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%75%25%
3.41
Soraya Molano
16W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.38

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.