Teams

Gaines- NC -Cc Oxford

2026 Combo Doubles 18&Over-NC · Women 6.5

14 players · average NTRP 3.40 / MISSISSIPPI

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 →
Schedule3 upcoming · 4 played
Sep 17 7:30 PM
Southaven Tennis Center
Sep 20 3:00 PM
vs
The Country Club of Oxford
Sep 27 5:00 PM
Southaven Tennis Center
2026-09-03vs Green-NC-SouthavenWon 21
W#1 DoublesPriscilla Hawkins / Ramey Hardin vs Megan Green / Houstyn Loosier7-5, 6-3
L#2 DoublesShannon Willoughby / Kathryn Lance vs Angela Payne / Karen Sandridge7-5, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesEmma Gaines / Hallie Beasley vs Christine Ohrberg / Candace Dunlap6-4, 6-0
2026-08-30vs Arnell 18+6.5Won 21
W#1 DoublesLeslie Sivley / Ramey Hardin vs Christine Loftin / Maricela Robles-Murguia6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesCaroline Frazer / Celia Wood vs Destin Sidle / Mandy Alford6-0, 2-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesEmma Gaines / Hallie Beasley vs Amy Arnell / Veronica Anthony6-4, 6-3
2026-08-23vs Poulelis- NC- SouthavenLost 12
L#1 DoublesMargaret Baker / Celia Wood vs Ginna Abbey / Lacey Dunlap6-1, 6-7, 0-1
L#2 DoublesPriscilla Hawkins / Campbell Smith vs Shelby Kennedy / Lou Ann Sanders2-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesCallie Kidder / Caroline Frazer vs Lisa Womack / Grace Bann7-5, 1-6, 1-0
2026-08-13vs Poulelis- NC- SouthavenLost 12
L#1 DoublesPriscilla Hawkins / Michelle McAuley vs Vonya Day / Shelby Kennedy1-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesShannon Willoughby / Leslie Sivley vs Kathlene Poulelis / Grace Bann4-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesEmma Gaines / Hallie Beasley vs Melanie Sparks / Ashley Brewer6-1, 6-0
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 standings5 teams · Women 6.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Green-NC-Southaven103006
2Poulelis- NC- Southaven1021222
3Arnell 18+6.5000000
4Gaines- NC -Cc Oxford0112426
5Emily Green - NC - 18+ 6.5 Combo0103636

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 2.86 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.

3.25
Callie Kidder
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.10
Hallie Beasley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.04
Campbell Smith
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.99
Celia Wood
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.96
Leslie Sivley
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.92
Ramey Hardin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.80
Shannon Willoughby
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.76
Margaret Baker
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.71
Michelle McAuley
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.68
Priscilla Hawkins
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
2.60
Emma Gaines
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published
2.57
Caroline Frazer
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
Kathryn Lance
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.

Anna Catherine Boudreaux + Ramey Hardin12172% games+30.1% vs expected
Michelle McAuley + Celia Wood5453% games+15.4% vs expected
Margaret Baker + Priscilla Hawkins4161% games+13.9% vs expected
Anna Catherine Boudreaux + Campbell Smith314 matchesnot enough data
Margaret Baker + Caroline Frazer314 matchesnot enough data
Ramey Hardin + Priscilla Hawkins314 matchesnot enough data
Priscilla Hawkins + Emma Gaines224 matchesnot enough data
Hallie Beasley + Emma Gaines303 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.

3.5
Anna Catherine Boudreaux
19W–3L career · no lines in 2026
3%93%4%
3.25
3.5
Callie Kidder
1W–0L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Hallie Beasley
27W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%<1%>99%
3.10
3.5
Campbell Smith
12W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
40%60%<1%
3.04
3.5
Celia Wood
17W–30L career · 2 lines in 2026
52%48%<1%
2.99
Leslie Sivley
5W–1L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%62%38%
2.96
Ramey Hardin
22W–11L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%<1%>99%
2.92
Shannon Willoughby
3W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.80
Margaret Baker
21W–13L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%3%97%
2.76
Michelle McAuley
8W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
98%2%<1%
2.71
Priscilla Hawkins
22W–18L career · 6 lines in 2026
0%10%90%
2.68
Emma Gaines
25W–12L career · 7 lines in 2026
0%25%75%
2.60
3
Caroline Frazer
15W–8L career · 3 lines in 2026
32%68%<1%
2.57
Kathryn Lance
7W–8L career · 1 line in 2026
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.