Teams

Davis/Memphis

2025 Tri-Level 40 & Over - Memphis · 4.5, 4.0, 3.5 Women

15 players · average NTRP 4.00 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-07-23vs Miller/MemphisWon 10
W#1 DoublesStephanie Dent / Andrea Henry vs Claire Fowler / Lynn Davis6-3, 6-3
2025-07-16vs Deupree/MemphisLost 01
L#1 DoublesJorianne Siskin / Andrea Henry vs Angie Deupree / Joanna Fuhrman2-6, 1-6
2025-06-25vs Flesch/MemphisWon 20
W#1 DoublesStacey Hyde / Rachel Baker vs Robin Barringer / Darlene Loprete6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesRebecca Conrad / Lisa Bailey vs Tina Schneiderman / Christine Scifert2-6, 7-5, 1-0
2025-06-04vs Churchey/MemphisWon 10
W#2 DoublesLisa Bailey / Rebecca Conrad vs Cheryl Murphy / Michelle Stockton6-3, 3-6, 1-0
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 4.5, 4.0, 3.5 Women 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 3.70 estimated across 15 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.

4.20
Dana Bray
published 4.5
4.20
Wang-Ying Glasgow
published
4.09
Lina Yi
published
4.00
Shannon McCalla
published
3.94
Dee Pitawanakwat
published 4
3.92
Ginger Murdoch
published
3.89
Lu Schneider
published
3.70
Stacey Hyde
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.69
Laura Hollis-Talley
published
3.67
Darlene Loprete
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.62
Andrea Henry
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.42
Dee Bias
published 3.5
3.20
Rebecca Conrad
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.96
Kelly Kitabchi
published
2.94
Patricia Hayes
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.

Kelly Kitabchi + Rebecca Conrad4256% games+5.9% vs expected
Stacey Hyde + Laura Hollis-Talley19658% games+5.2% vs expected
Lina Yi + Wang-Ying Glasgow7753% games+0.3% vs expected
Darlene Loprete + Rebecca Conrad5846% games−6.9% vs expected
Dee Pitawanakwat + Lu Schneider4164% gamesnot enough data
Shannon McCalla + Dana Bray213 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.

4.5
Dana Bray
25W–13L career · no lines in 2025
8%91%2%
4.20
Wang-Ying Glasgow
24W–17L career · no lines in 2025
8%91%2%
4.20
Lina Yi
17W–14L career · no lines in 2025
25%75%<1%
4.09
Shannon McCalla
24W–18L career · no lines in 2025
51%49%<1%
4.00
4
Dee Pitawanakwat
42W–12L career · no lines in 2025
<1%67%33%
3.94
Ginger Murdoch
3W–7L career · no lines in 2025
71%29%<1%
3.92
Lu Schneider
13W–9L career · no lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
3.89
Stacey Hyde
33W–21L career · 1 line in 2025
8%91%2%
3.70
Laura Hollis-Talley
37W–24L career · no lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.69
4
Darlene Loprete
14W–23L career · 1 line in 2025
11%88%1%
3.67
4
Andrea Henry
32W–32L career · 2 lines in 2025
19%80%<1%
3.62
3.5
Dee Bias
11W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%72%28%
3.42
Rebecca Conrad
25W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
8%91%2%
3.20
Kelly Kitabchi
12W–18L career · no lines in 2025
61%39%<1%
2.96
Patricia Hayes
11W–9L career · no lines in 2025
66%34%<1%
2.94

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.