Teams

Blackthorn/META

2025 Combo 40 & over-META · 7.5 Senior Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.88 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-10-05vs Hagood/METAWon 21
W#1 DoublesStacie Torbett / Soma Mukherjee vs Susan Taylor / Liz Guillemette7-5, 6-3
L#2 DoublesIvanna Stewart / Pam Mobley vs Analida Alexay / Mary Warner1-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesMary DiSantis / Lisa Scherping vs Alice Zhang / Shannon Hinkle6-4, 6-2
2025-09-29vs Hagood/METAWon 21
W#1 DoublesEmily Caveney / Soma Mukherjee vs Alice Zhang / Donna Morris4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesStacie Torbett / Traci Stone vs Kim Ewing / Carolyn Webb4-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesDusty Blackburn / Marcia Sentell vs Gail Archer / Susan Taylor6-1, 6-0
2025-09-23vs Hagood/METALost 12
L#1 DoublesEmily Caveney / Marcia Sentell vs Alice Zhang / Jacquelyn Wondergem6-1, 0-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCecile Huddleston / Taihi Egres vs Kim Ewing / Mary Warner1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesMary DiSantis / Lisa Scherping vs Analida Alexay / Shannon Hinkle6-3, 6-3
2025-09-16vs Hagood/METALost 12
W#1 DoublesLisa Scherping / Emily Caveney vs Jacquelyn Wondergem / Liz Guillemette6-1, 6-3
L#2 DoublesMary DiSantis / Theresa Boyd vs Donna Morris / Alice Zhang4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesIvanna Stewart / Laura Garrett vs Analida Alexay / Mary Warner7-6, 6-7, 0-1
2025-08-25vs Hagood/METALost 12
W#1 DoublesEmily Caveney / Lisa Scherping vs Analida Alexay / Mary Warner6-3, 6-2
L#2 DoublesStephanie Summers / Traci Stone vs Alice Zhang / Donna Morris1-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesTheresa Boyd / Taihi Egres vs Kim Ewing / Carolyn Webb0-6, 3-6
2025-08-23vs Hagood/METASplit 11
W#1 DoublesLisa Scherping / Stacie Torbett vs Analida Alexay / Donna Morris2-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDusty Blackburn / Traci Stone vs Carolyn Webb / Kim Ewing1-6, 6-2, 0-1
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 standings2 teams · 7.5 Senior Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Hagood/META4210819147
2Blackthorn/META2481022161

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.61 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.

4.08
Emily Caveney
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.79
Dusty Blackburn
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.78
Mary DiSantis
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.73
Stacie Torbett
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.69
Ivanna Stewart
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.66
Taihi Egres
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.62
Stephanie Summers
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.54
Soma Mukherjee
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.53
Marcia Sentell
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.46
Lisa Scherping
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
3.28
Pam Mobley
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Cecile Huddleston
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.17
Theresa Boyd
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
Traci Stone
usually #2 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.

Mary DiSantis + Dusty Blackburn5358% games+0.9% vs expected
Mary DiSantis + Emily Caveney7257% games−0.6% vs expected
Ivanna Stewart + Dusty Blackburn3252% games−0.7% vs expected
Mary DiSantis + Taihi Egres4447% games−4.2% vs expected
Stacie Torbett + Taihi Egres2352% gamesnot enough data
Stacie Torbett + Emily Caveney224 matchesnot enough data
Taihi Egres + Dusty Blackburn134 matchesnot enough data
Ivanna Stewart + Taihi Egres213 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.

4
Emily Caveney
30W–13L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%26%74%
4.08
4
Dusty Blackburn
14W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.79
Mary DiSantis
39W–20L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%94%5%
3.78
Stacie Torbett
15W–13L career · 3 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Ivanna Stewart
25W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.69
Taihi Egres
20W–20L career · 2 lines in 2025
10%89%<1%
3.66
Stephanie Summers
8W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
18%82%<1%
3.62
Soma Mukherjee
16W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
37%63%<1%
3.54
Marcia Sentell
10W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%41%59%
3.53
Lisa Scherping
7W–1L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%63%37%
3.46
Pam Mobley
13W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.28
3.5
Cecile Huddleston
0W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Theresa Boyd
12W–12L career · 5 lines in 2025
10%90%1%
3.17
Traci Stone
1W–4L career · 3 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.