Teams

DOYLE

2026 Combo Doubles 18&Over-NC · Women 2.5

8 players · average NTRP 2.50 / MISSISSIPPI

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-27vs Lambert 2.5 NCWon 21
W#1 DoublesMichelle Corbin / Kim Yount vs Katie Gobbell / Arielle Santander6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesLisa Wingo / Loretta McKim vs Cody Lambert / Presley Casto6-3, 6-4
L#3 DoublesJennifer Doyle / Kimberly Tarsi vs Rhonda Chapman / Madeline Skehan1-6, 3-6
2026-08-17vs LovellWon 30
W#1 DoublesLoretta McKim / Lisa Wingo vs Tarol Clements / Teri Lynn Gordon6-4, 6-0
W#2 DoublesSonja Dickey / Kim Yount vs Whitney Hale / Heather Williams6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesJennifer Doyle / Kimberly Tarsi vs Stacy Michael / Jamie Freeman6-1, 6-2
2026-08-13vs Smith/PaxtonWon 20
W#1 DoublesMichelle Corbin / Kim Yount vs Danielle Paxton / Christa Smith7-5, 6-3
W#2 DoublesAnna Claire Parker / Penny Tubbs vs Connie Clarkson / Mary Gates Heidelberg1-6, 6-4, 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 Women 2.5 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 2.42 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.

2.77
Michelle Corbin
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.45
Loretta McKim
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.43
Kim Yount
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.43
Anna Claire Parker
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.36
Lisa Wingo
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.35
Sonja Dickey
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.13
Kimberly Tarsi
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Penny Tubbs
usually #2 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.

Michelle Corbin + Kim Yount5166% games+4.9% vs expected
Loretta McKim + Lisa Wingo6650% games−1.7% vs expected
Lisa Wingo + Kim Yount213 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.

Michelle Corbin
29W–11L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%2%98%
2.77
Loretta McKim
11W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%64%36%
2.45
Kim Yount
26W–22L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%68%32%
2.43
2.5
Anna Claire Parker
3W–2L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
0%70%30%
2.43
Lisa Wingo
15W–16L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%85%15%
2.36
Sonja Dickey
6W–15L career · 1 line in 2026
0%85%15%
2.35
Kimberly Tarsi
10W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.13
Penny Tubbs
1W–0L career · 1 line 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.