Teams

Curtiss/Memphis

2025 Adult 18 & Over -Memphis · 3.0 Women 18 & over

11 players · average NTRP 3.00 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-04-27vs Vest/MemphisWon 40
W#1 DoublesAudrey Darrohn / Mackenzie Harbin vs Heather Queen / Jennifer Gladstone6-3, 7-5
W#1 SinglesTricia Murphy Adkins vs Christian Turner4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#2 SinglesAnn Church vs Katherine Ray6-1, 6-0
W#3 DoublesKathryn Curtiss / Allie Sloane vs Joelle Rogin / Katie Townsend6-2, 6-1
2025-03-23vs Vest/MemphisWon 41
W#1 DoublesWhitney Williams / Tricia Murphy Adkins vs Tracye Burford / Jennifer Gladstone6-3, 2-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesKathryn Curtiss vs Courtney Vest6-3, 6-2
L#2 DoublesSumner Jefferson / Hart Kelman vs Christian Turner / Chapman Morrow7-5, 3-6, 0-1
W#2 SinglesAudrey Darrohn vs Tracy Balton6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJessica McDaniel / Mackenzie Harbin vs Elisa Marus / Meera Wright6-0, 6-2
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 3.0 Women 18 & over 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 2.59 estimated across 11 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.

2.94
Tricia Murphy Adkins
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.87
Jessica McDaniel
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.85
Mackenzie Harbin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.81
Kathryn Curtiss
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
2.60
Audrey Darrohn
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
2.48
2.46
Sumner Jefferson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.42
Hart Kelman
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.40
Ann Church
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
2.31
Allie Sloane
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.29
Tanner Baker
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · 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.

Allie Sloane + Kathryn Curtiss5447% games+7.7% vs expected
Allie Sloane + Sumner Jefferson033 matchesnot enough data
Kathryn Curtiss + Jessica McDaniel213 matchesnot enough data
Jessica McDaniel + Mackenzie Harbin123 matchesnot enough data
Jessica McDaniel + Tricia Murphy Adkins213 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.

Tricia Murphy Adkins
16W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%68%32%
2.94
Jessica McDaniel
10W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%83%16%
2.87
Mackenzie Harbin
9W–3L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%87%13%
2.85
Kathryn Curtiss
12W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
2.81
3
Audrey Darrohn
6W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
2.60
Sydney Tomes Steffner
12W–10L career · no lines in 2025
0%55%45%
2.48
Sumner Jefferson
3W–18L career · 1 line in 2025
63%37%<1%
2.46
3
Hart Kelman
10W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
73%27%<1%
2.42
3
Ann Church
5W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
77%23%<1%
2.40
3
Allie Sloane
8W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
92%8%<1%
2.31
Tanner Baker
15W–23L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%95%5%
2.29

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.