Teams

Trout/Bentonville/KTC

2026 Tri-Level 18 & Over · 4.0

15 players · average NTRP 3.25 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-08-06vs Fenton/Fayetteville/SRCLost 02
L#1 DoublesCourtney Kleinebreil / Natalie Gorman vs Nellie Beall / Charlee Brewer2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesMeagan Flake / Britt Mcewen vs Leslie Copeland / Cassie Booth6-7, 2-6
2026-08-03vs Berger-Overton/Rogers/PCCLost 12
L#1 DoublesCarrie Beere / Meagan Flake vs Sally Beemsterboer / Kathryn Stark3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesAndrea Trout / Michelle van Schenck vs Carrie Overton / Caren Berger5-7, 6-1, 1-0
L#3 DoublesCourtney Kleinebreil / Natalie Gorman vs Sharon Gunter / Libby Schaller5-7, 3-6
2026-07-28vs Donnell/Fayetteville/FACSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMichelle van Schenck / Sydney Lank vs Casey Tauber / Natalie Mayer1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesBritt Mcewen / Maria Pearson vs Jena Newman / Jenna Donnell6-1, 6-4
2026-07-17vs Schley/Springdale/MRCLost 02
L#1 DoublesSydney Lank / Angela Landry vs Lauren DeLeon / Ellen Lundy0-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesCarrie Beere / Britt Mcewen vs Katherine Wetzel / Heather Snell5-7, 4-6
2026-07-15vs Tarnasky/Fayetteville/FACLost 01
L#1 DoublesLaura Tidwell / Sydney Lank vs Judith Boen / Debby Blackburn2-6, 1-6
2026-06-22vs Neal/Rogers/SVCCSplit 11
L#2 DoublesAndrea Trout / Laura Tidwell vs Piper Anderson / Gabriela Bottger1-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesBritt Mcewen / Maria Pearson vs Jamie Wilson / Christy Williams6-3, 6-4
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 · 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Kushmaul-Kurin/Rogers/MRC6117412131
2Trout/Bentonville/KTC6115614139
3Puryear-Lux/Fayetteville/FAC4212616148
4Chrisman-Schutz/Springdale/SRC1561226180
5Stroup/Lowell/MRC0631530190

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 3.08 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.

3.38
Sydney Lank
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.37
Natalie Gorman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.29
Michelle van Schenck
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.29
Caroline Soerensen
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.22
Courtney Kleinebreil
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.13
Angela Landry
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.12
Andrea Trout
usually #2 Doubles 71%, also #1 Doubles 14% · published 3
3.11
Lauren Shillcutt
published
3.05
Laura Tidwell
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.00
Rebecca Bell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.95
Madelyn Guido
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.94
Carrie Beere
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.77
Britt Mcewen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.45
Meagan Flake
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Maria Pearson
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.

Caroline Soerensen + Madelyn Guido4164% games+12.7% vs expected
Madelyn Guido + Angela Landry3448% games+8.8% vs expected
Courtney Kleinebreil + Caroline Soerensen314 matchesnot enough data
Courtney Kleinebreil + Rebecca Bell044 matchesnot enough data
Laura Tidwell + Andrea Trout213 matchesnot enough data
Carrie Beere + Andrea Trout303 matchesnot enough data
Carrie Beere + Meagan Flake033 matchesnot enough data
Carrie Beere + Britt Mcewen123 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.

Sydney Lank
0W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
81%19%<1%
3.38
Natalie Gorman
34W–28L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%84%16%
3.37
Michelle van Schenck
27W–38L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Caroline Soerensen
26W–12L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%94%5%
3.29
3.5
Courtney Kleinebreil
10W–20L career · 5 lines in 2026
5%94%1%
3.22
3.5
Angela Landry
15W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
15%84%<1%
3.13
3
Andrea Trout
42W–8L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%18%82%
3.12
Lauren Shillcutt
14W–18L career · no lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.11
Laura Tidwell
7W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
36%64%<1%
3.05
Rebecca Bell
6W–14L career · 1 line in 2026
50%50%<1%
3.00
Madelyn Guido
11W–17L career · 6 lines in 2026
66%34%<1%
2.95
3
Carrie Beere
34W–20L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
2.94
3
Britt Mcewen
4W–10L career · type S · 4 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
2.77
Meagan Flake
10W–14L career · 6 lines in 2026
0%66%34%
2.45
Maria Pearson
4W–3L career · no lines 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.