Teams

Rohlinger/Memphis

2026 Adult 18 & Over Early Start League - Memphis · 2.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 2.90 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-11-19vs Magness/MemphisWon 30
W#1 DoublesSamantha Rohlinger / Aimee Puryear vs Tracy Gallagher / Peyton Walker6-1, 6-4
W#1 SinglesAllison Webb vs Julia Magness6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesLindsay Miklos / Danielle Muntean vs Sarah Rager / Jeannie Boyd6-2, 6-2
2025-11-05vs Greer/MemphisWon 21
L#1 DoublesKristin Hicks / Allison Webb vs Kelsey Watts / Clare Swatley4-6, 4-6
W#1 SinglesCaitlyn Arkwright vs Mary Margaret Posey6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesTammy Evangelisti / Cori Egan vs Suzanne Lomax / Jennifer Stettler6-2, 6-4
2025-10-31vs McLaughlin/MemphisWon 30
W#1 DoublesRachel Burford / Tammy Evangelisti vs Bobbie Wonderly McLaughlin / Liza Easley6-2, 6-1
W#1 SinglesCaitlyn Arkwright vs Lyndsay Gronostaj6-4, 6-0
W#2 DoublesSamantha Rohlinger / Lindsay Miklos vs Angela Finerson / Caroline Parkes6-3, 6-4
2025-10-23vs McDermott/MemphisLost 12
L#1 DoublesRachel Burford / Kristin Hicks vs Katie McDermott / Krystal Shaw2-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesCaitlyn Arkwright vs Anna Avant6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesTammy Evangelisti / Aimee Puryear vs Brittany Glisson / Julie Little2-6, 3-6
2025-10-22vs Conrad/MemphisWon 30
W#1 DoublesSamantha Rohlinger / Rachel Burford vs Sarah Conrad / Emily D Folk6-3, 6-4
W#1 SinglesTammy Evangelisti vs Taylor Weston6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesAllison Webb / Danielle Muntean vs Amanda Ricketts / Mary Anne Pohlman6-1, 6-1
2025-10-22vs Conrad/MemphisLost 12
L#1 DoublesSamantha Rohlinger / Aimee Puryear vs Sarah Conrad / Laura Connerley6-7, 6-7
L#1 SinglesAllison Webb vs Amber McCabe6-4, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesLindsay Miklos / Cori Egan vs Chantall Jenkins / Danielle Montesi6-0, 6-0
2025-10-21vs Magness/MemphisWon 30
W#1 DoublesRachel Burford / Cori Egan vs Julia Magness / Mandy Gootzeit6-2, 6-0
W#1 SinglesLindsay Miklos vs Jeannie Boyd6-2, 6-0
W#2 DoublesKristin Hicks / Danielle Muntean vs Flavia Posey / Virginia Bricken6-0, 6-0
2025-10-01vs Witte/MemphisWon 30
W#1 DoublesSamantha Rohlinger / Lindsay Miklos vs Mary Wilkes Yonchak / Hannah Hackett7-5, 6-3
W#1 SinglesCaitlyn Arkwright vs Anne von Lanken6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesCori Egan / Danielle Muntean vs Caitlin Motte / KIMBERLY JUSSELY6-3, 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 standings13 teams · 2.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1McDermott/Memphis7118614136
2Rohlinger/Memphis6219510134
3Justice/Memphis6216819157
4Greer/Memphis5317717190
5Thornton/Memphis53131124202
6Davis/Memphis44121224191
7Wright/Memphis44121227217
8Witte/Memphis44111328197
9Flynt/Memphis26101431228
10McLaughlin/Memphis2691532231
11SLewis/Memphis2681633239
12Steffner/Memphis2691533240
13Magness/Memphis0812347291

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 2.49 estimated across 10 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.

2.75
Caitlyn Arkwright
usually #1 Singles 86%, also #2 Singles 14% · published 3
2.63
Danielle Muntean
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.57
Rachel Burford
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
2.55
Cori Egan
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.54
Kristin Hicks
usually #1 Doubles 88%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published
2.48
Tammy Evangelisti
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Singles 17% · published
2.37
Lindsay Miklos
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.36
Samantha Rohlinger
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.36
Aimee Puryear
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.33
Allison Webb
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Singles 29% · published 2.5
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.

Lindsay Miklos + Samantha Rohlinger2542% games−2.6% vs expected
Samantha Rohlinger + Aimee Puryear314 matchesnot enough data
Allison Webb + Danielle Muntean213 matchesnot enough data
Rachel Burford + Samantha Rohlinger303 matchesnot enough data
Cori Egan + Danielle Muntean213 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
Caitlyn Arkwright
14W–7L career · 7 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
2.75
3
Danielle Muntean
6W–3L career · 4 lines in 2026
18%82%<1%
2.63
Rachel Burford
26W–26L career · 7 lines in 2026
0%31%69%
2.57
3
Cori Egan
8W–5L career · 4 lines in 2026
37%63%<1%
2.55
Kristin Hicks
6W–11L career · 8 lines in 2026
0%39%61%
2.54
Tammy Evangelisti
11W–15L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%56%44%
2.48
Lindsay Miklos
10W–10L career · 8 lines in 2026
0%83%17%
2.37
Samantha Rohlinger
22W–20L career · 9 lines in 2026
0%84%16%
2.36
3
Aimee Puryear
7W–14L career · type A · 5 lines in 2026
84%16%<1%
2.36
2.5
Allison Webb
9W–24L career · 7 lines in 2026
0%89%11%
2.33

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.