Teams

Tang/ Knoxville

2025 Tri-Level 18 & Over-Knoxville · 4.5,4.0,3.5 Women

15 players · average NTRP 4.00 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule12 played
2025-03-01vs Unger/KnoxvilleLost 01
L#1 DoublesCarrie Hayes / Tori Hayes vs HAILEY NEDS / Laura Wolfe0-6, 2-6
2025-02-28vs Unger/KnoxvilleLost 12
W#1 DoublesPaige Brown / Laura Wolfe vs Robin Smith / Kristie Danby6-4, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKayce Drennan / Stephanie Nichols vs Deanna Unger / MARISA GRAHAM1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesYoko Umezawa / Linda Roback vs Emily Mcclenagan / Allison King2-6, 3-6
2025-02-08vs Williams/KnoxvilleLost 01
L#1 DoublesCarrie Hayes / Emily Jenkins vs Brooke Williams / Victoria Sissom5-7, 2-6
2025-02-08vs MartinWon 10
W#1 DoublesLaura Wolfe / Cameron Beedle vs Lori DeRoos / Nicole White6-3, 7-6
2025-02-07vs OPENWon 10
W#1 DoublesLinda Roback / Paola Martinez vs Suzanne Mubarak / Kimberly Nelson6-3, 6-1
2025-02-02vs Unger/KnoxvilleLost 03
L#1 DoublesFrancesca Robinson / Laura Wolfe vs Jennifer Douglas / Wendy Petty6-7, 4-6
L#2 DoublesEve Tang / Julia Slagle vs Deanna Unger / Abigail Osborne4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesJessie Ostrowski / Laura Warrick vs Paola Martinez / Allison King3-6, 3-6
2025-02-01vs Williams/KnoxvilleWon 10
W#1 DoublesAbigail Osborne / Laura Wolfe vs Kimberly Woody / Gabriella Rimmer6-3, 6-4
2025-01-25vs Unger/KnoxvilleLost 01
L#1 DoublesCarrie Hayes / Erin Upshaw vs HAILEY NEDS / Abigail Osborne3-6, 3-6
2025-01-19vs Unger/KnoxvilleLost 12
W#1 DoublesLaura Wolfe / Paige Brown vs Wendy Petty / Robin Smith6-3, 7-5
L#2 DoublesCarrie Hayes / Natalie Harrison vs HAILEY NEDS / Abigail Osborne3-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesMichelle Uhlenhake / Jenne MacCagli vs Paola Martinez / Emily Elison3-6, 2-6
2025-01-18vs MartinLost 01
L#1 DoublesCameron Beedle / HAILEY NEDS vs Santana Ewers / Lisa Perkey5-7, 4-6
2025-01-17vs McElrathSarratWon 10
W#1 DoublesAlison Kitchiner / Laura Warrick vs Tabitha McElrath / Anna Monarch7-6, 6-2
2025-01-12Won 10
W#1 DoublesKayce Drennan / Laura Wolfe vs Brooke Williams / Lauren Hall6-3, 4-6, 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 3.54 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.

4.33
Sarah Rainwater
published
3.99
Laura Wolfe
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.87
Kayce Drennan
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.87
Francesca Robinson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.81
Julia Slagle
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.60
Carrie Hayes
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.54
Cameron Beedle
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.53
Natalie Harrison
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.47
Eve Tang
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.29
Jessie Ostrowski
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.29
Laura Warrick
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.19
Linda Roback
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.15
Yoko Umezawa
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.11
Michelle Uhlenhake
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.02
Jenne MacCagli
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Laura Warrick + Jessie Ostrowski6453% games+6.9% vs expected
Jenne MacCagli + Michelle Uhlenhake81640% games+3.3% vs expected
Laura Warrick + Linda Roback171250% games−2.2% vs expected
Kayce Drennan + Carrie Hayes4154% gamesnot enough data
Eve Tang + Julia Slagle224 matchesnot enough data
Cameron Beedle + Laura Wolfe213 matchesnot enough data
Eve Tang + Yoko Umezawa033 matchesnot enough data
Yoko Umezawa + Linda Roback213 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.

Sarah Rainwater
5W–3L career · no lines in 2025
1%89%10%
4.33
Laura Wolfe
40W–10L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%54%46%
3.99
Kayce Drennan
26W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%84%15%
3.87
4
Francesca Robinson
11W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%85%15%
3.87
Julia Slagle
27W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
1%92%7%
3.81
4
Carrie Hayes
17W–33L career · 4 lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
3.60
4
Cameron Beedle
10W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
36%64%<1%
3.54
Natalie Harrison
14W–32L career · 1 line in 2025
40%60%<1%
3.53
4
Eve Tang
18W–28L career · type A · 1 line in 2025
58%42%<1%
3.47
Jessie Ostrowski
15W–21L career · 1 line in 2025
1%93%6%
3.29
Laura Warrick
55W–50L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%94%5%
3.29
Linda Roback
26W–32L career · 2 lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.19
Yoko Umezawa
15W–60L career · 1 line in 2025
13%86%<1%
3.15
Michelle Uhlenhake
28W–57L career · 1 line in 2025
21%79%<1%
3.11
Jenne MacCagli
18W–34L career · 1 line in 2025
43%57%<1%
3.02

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.