Teams

Goetsch/Memphis

2025 Adult 18 & Over Early Start League - Memphis · 4.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.83 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2024-11-07vs Burt/MemphisWon 31
W#1 DoublesAnita Kang / Teresa Goetsch vs Palmer Burt / Jennifer Keras6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesRandi Mullaney / Jennifer Holland vs Maggie Lovell / Sarah Haygood2-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#2 SinglesMandy Alford vs Elizabeth Carlisle3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesTerri Smith / Hollie Federman vs Jessica Roberson / Alexandra Roll6-4, 6-1
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 standings for 4.0 Women 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 3.41 estimated across 14 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.

3.71
Anna Whitmire
published 4
3.65
Tammy Chapman
published
3.57
Dianna Ptacek
published 4
3.53
Teresa Goetsch
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.50
Shellie ORear
published
3.49
Hollie Federman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.46
Cheryl Ellis
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.38
Anita Kang
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.34
Candace Browning
published 4
3.33
Amanda Perry
published 4
3.26
Stacy Foreman
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.24
Randi Mullaney
usually #1 Doubles 30%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published
3.20
Sithina Yong
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
3.06
Mandy Alford
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · 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.

Anita Kang + Teresa Goetsch9553% games+5.0% vs expected
Tammy Chapman + Candace Browning7455% games+1.2% vs expected
Randi Mullaney + Stacy Foreman8555% games−3.4% vs expected
Shellie ORear + Amanda Perry314 matchesnot enough data
Anna Whitmire + Anita Kang213 matchesnot enough data
Tammy Chapman + Amanda Perry303 matchesnot enough data
Sithina Yong + Dianna Ptacek123 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
Anna Whitmire
10W–10L career · no lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.71
Tammy Chapman
21W–8L career · no lines in 2025
13%86%1%
3.65
4
Dianna Ptacek
8W–8L career · no lines in 2025
32%68%<1%
3.57
Teresa Goetsch
12W–7L career · 4 lines in 2025
40%60%<1%
3.53
Shellie ORear
5W–2L career · no lines in 2025
50%50%<1%
3.50
Hollie Federman
8W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%53%47%
3.49
3.5
Cheryl Ellis
20W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%62%38%
3.46
3.5
Anita Kang
18W–11L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%79%20%
3.38
4
Candace Browning
24W–13L career · no lines in 2025
88%12%<1%
3.34
4
Amanda Perry
9W–6L career · no lines in 2025
88%12%<1%
3.33
Stacy Foreman
18W–15L career · 5 lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.26
Randi Mullaney
27W–22L career · 9 lines in 2025
4%93%3%
3.24
Sithina Yong
7W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
8%91%2%
3.20
Mandy Alford
36W–31L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
3.06

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.