Teams

Flanagan 7.0 Mixed 40+ Tues

2023 Piedmont Mixed 40 & Over · 7.0 Mixed 40+ Tues PM

14 players · average NTRP 3.40 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-07-25vs Tapler/OFRC 7.0 Mixed 40+ TuesWon 10
W#2 DoublesAshley Fuquay / Emily Wilson vs Erin Cockman / Danny Carter6-3, 6-4
2023-07-11vs Herron/Berreth 7.0 Mixed 40+ TuesLost 01
L#1 DoublesEmily Wilson / Ashley Fuquay vs April McAfee / Jeff Shealy1-6, 2-6
2023-06-27vs Roley 7.0 Mixed 40+ TuesWon 10
W#2 DoublesEmily Wilson / Ashley Fuquay vs Pat Hogan / Marian Hogan4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2023-06-06vs Whichard 7.0 Mixed 40+ TuesWon 10
W#3 DoublesLuke Rhoten / Emily Wilson vs Lara Heberle / Doug Heberle6-3, 6-3
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 7.0 Mixed 40+ Tues PM 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 3.26 estimated across 13 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.

3.69
Julie Dover
published
3.63
Kevin Dover
published
3.60
Luke Rhoten
published
3.48
Ashley Fuquay
published 3.5
3.35
Reeves Rhoten
published
3.31
Britt Flanagan
published 3.5
3.17
Aprille Black
published 3.5
3.10
Emily Wilson
usually #2 Doubles 38%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.08
Thomas Dagger
published
3.04
Mary Winstead
published
3.02
Paull Boger
published
2.96
Courtney Dagger
published 3
2.90
Mark Littrell
published
Patrick Flanagan
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.

Julie Dover + Kevin Dover6163% games+8.4% vs expected
Reeves Rhoten + Luke Rhoten7264% games+6.1% vs expected
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.

Julie Dover
41W–22L career · no lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.69
Kevin Dover
45W–9L career · no lines in 2023
<1%15%85%
3.63
Luke Rhoten
50W–17L career · no lines in 2023
<1%23%77%
3.60
3.5
Ashley Fuquay
35W–17L career · no lines in 2023
<1%57%43%
3.48
Reeves Rhoten
30W–16L career · no lines in 2023
<1%87%13%
3.35
3.5
Britt Flanagan
13W–10L career · no lines in 2023
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Aprille Black
11W–21L career · no lines in 2023
9%90%1%
3.17
3.5
Emily Wilson
179W–124L career · 8 lines in 2023
23%77%<1%
3.10
Thomas Dagger
4W–5L career · no lines in 2023
27%73%<1%
3.08
Mary Winstead
16W–22L career · no lines in 2023
38%62%<1%
3.04
Paull Boger
0W–5L career · no lines in 2023
45%55%<1%
3.02
3
Courtney Dagger
37W–29L career · no lines in 2023
<1%62%38%
2.96
Mark Littrell
9W–6L career · no lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
2.90
Patrick Flanagan
3W–3L career · no lines in 2023
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.