Teams

Mullens/FS/BG

2026 Adult 40 & Over Spring 3 League · 2.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 2.50 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-05-12vs Bracken/FS/CMLost 12
L#1 DoublesSharon Guzman / Erin Barker vs Angelica Hernandez / Kathryn Rogers1-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesWendy Mullens / Emma Robertson vs Sally Bracken / Cynthia Bushnaq6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesEmily Knoll / Monique Bracken vs Jeanette Mccain / Jennifer Hurst0-6, 1-6
2026-05-12vs Bracken/FS/CMLost 12
L#1 DoublesEmily Knoll / Annette Summers vs Jeanette Mccain / Jennifer Hurst1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesMitzi Efurd / Monique Bracken vs Shannon Blatt / Cynthia Bushnaq7-6, 1-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesWendy Mullens / Sharon Guzman vs Sally Bracken / Kathryn Rogers6-2, 6-3
2026-05-12vs Bracken/FS/CMSplit 11
L#1 DoublesEmma Robertson / Erin Barker vs Sally Bracken / Kathryn Rogers7-6, 2-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesWendy Mullens / Sharon Guzman vs Jeanette Mccain / Cynthia Bushnaq6-2, 6-4
2026-04-01vs Bracken/FS/CMLost 12
L#1 DoublesWhitney Marcotte / Emily Knoll vs Jeanette Mccain / Jennifer Hurst1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesMonique Bracken / Mitzi Efurd vs Shannon Blatt / Kathryn Rogers4-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesWendy Mullens / Emma Robertson vs Sally Bracken / Angelica Hernandez6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2026-03-14vs Bracken/FS/CMLost 03
L#1 DoublesMitzi Efurd / Annette Summers vs Jeanette Mccain / Jennifer Hurst0-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 DoublesEmma Robertson / Jacie Hamby vs Shannon Blatt / Angelica Hernandez6-7, 6-2, 0-1
L#3 DoublesEmily Knoll / Whitney Marcotte vs Sally Bracken / Cynthia Bushnaq6-7, 6-2, 0-1
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 standings2 teams · 2.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Bracken/FS/CM4110515123
2Mullens/FS/BG1451021140

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 2.11 estimated across 9 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.

2.49
Jacie Hamby
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
Angel Geels
published 2.5
2.23
Wendy Mullens
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published
2.17
Sharon Guzman
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #4 Doubles 25% · published
2.12
Monique Bracken
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.10
Annette Summers
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.08
Whitney Marcotte
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.02
Erin Barker
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
1.99
Mitzi Efurd
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
1.80
Emily Knoll
usually #4 Doubles 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.

Sharon Guzman + Wendy Mullens213 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.

Jacie Hamby
22W–7L career · 7 lines in 2026
0%53%47%
2.49
2.5
Angel Geels
1W–1L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Wendy Mullens
15W–21L career · 10 lines in 2026
0%97%3%
2.23
Sharon Guzman
10W–12L career · 8 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.17
Monique Bracken
3W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.12
2.5
Annette Summers
2W–4L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.10
Whitney Marcotte
6W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.08
Erin Barker
2W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.02
Mitzi Efurd
2W–12L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.99
Emily Knoll
3W–21L career · 8 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.80

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.