Teams

Enk/40s/4.0-3.0/PAC

2026 Man · Cov Tri Level 40 & Over - Women Day

16 players · average NTRP 3.50 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Flight standings3 teams · Cov Tri Level 40 & Over - Women Day
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Enk/40s/4.0-3.0/PAC5315922190
2Scott/40s/4.0-3.0/FAC53121226216
3Magness/40s/4..0-3.0/SC2691532250

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 3.44 estimated across 7 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.

3.80
Amy Burdette
usually #1 Doubles 41%, also #2 Doubles 26% · published 4
3.79
Vicky Martin
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.48
April Luscy
usually #2 Doubles 39%, also #3 Doubles 31% · published 4
3.43
Alecia Seastrunk
usually #2 Doubles 47%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.32
Amber Mata
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #2 Doubles 39% · published 3.5
3.17
Ann Boushie
usually #1 Doubles 49%, also #2 Doubles 23% · published 3
3.09
Crissy Green
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published 3
Fran Dominique
usually #3 Doubles 59%, also #2 Doubles 23% · published
Marta Brasseaux
usually #3 Doubles 41%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Mary Toce
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 41% · published
Merritt Edwards
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Michelle Otillio
usually #2 Doubles 36%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published
Patricia Schultz
usually #1 Doubles 65%, also #3 Doubles 18% · published
Rebecca Sandoz
usually #3 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 35% · published
Regina Knight
usually #3 Doubles 47%, also #2 Doubles 24% · published
Shannon Enk
usually #1 Doubles 41%, also #2 Doubles 38% · 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.

Merritt Edwards + Shannon Enk4355% gamesnot enough data
Regina Knight + Merritt Edwards1440% gamesnot enough data
Shannon Enk + Marta Brasseaux134 matchesnot enough data
April Luscy + Patricia Schultz303 matchesnot enough data
Shannon Enk + Mary Toce213 matchesnot enough data
Alecia Seastrunk + Crissy Green213 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.

4
Amy Burdette
29W–14L career · 26 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.80
Vicky Martin
15W–8L career · 9 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.79
4
April Luscy
12W–13L career · 13 lines in 2026
55%45%<1%
3.48
3.5
Alecia Seastrunk
14W–12L career · 15 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
3.43
3.5
Amber Mata
19W–29L career · 26 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.32
3
Ann Boushie
47W–18L career · 34 lines in 2026
<1%11%89%
3.17
3
Crissy Green
30W–11L career · 26 lines in 2026
<1%26%74%
3.09
Fran Dominique
27W–26L career · 22 lines in 2026
not enough data
Marta Brasseaux
14W–14L career · 17 lines in 2026
not enough data
Mary Toce
30W–23L career · 22 lines in 2026
not enough data
Merritt Edwards
29W–18L career · 21 lines in 2026
not enough data
Michelle Otillio
7W–5L career · 11 lines in 2026
not enough data
Patricia Schultz
15W–9L career · 17 lines in 2026
not enough data
Rebecca Sandoz
29W–18L career · 23 lines in 2026
not enough data
Regina Knight
16W–19L career · 16 lines in 2026
not enough data
Shannon Enk
45W–27L career · 37 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.