Teams

Lacy/Memphis-split courts

2022 Adult 18 & Over -Memphis · 3.0 Women 18 & over

12 players · average NTRP 3.08 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-05-01vs Nair/MemphisWon 10
W#3 DoublesSusan Northen-Lacy / Natalie Taylor vs Monica Gallimore / Karen Hamburger6-1, 2-6, 1-0
2022-04-10vs Daves/Memphis-split courtsWon 10
W#1 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Amy Poag6-0, 6-1
2022-04-05vs Rheney/MemphisWon 10
W#1 DoublesSusan Northen-Lacy / Natalie Taylor vs Kate Carruthers / Patience Whitten6-3, 6-4
2022-04-03vs TerBurgh/MemphisLost 01
L#1 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Vonya Day6-7, 6-3, 0-1
2022-03-06vs Livingston/MemphisLost 01
L#1 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Liza Livingston4-6, 2-6
2022-03-03Won 10
W#2 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Kathryn Reed6-0, 6-0
2022-02-27Lost 01
L#1 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Elizabeth Johnson2-6, 2-6
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 3.0 Women 18 & over 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 2.90 estimated across 11 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.

3.53
Natalie Taylor
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #2 Singles 14% · published
3.41
Bradi Bair
published 3.5
3.21
Gail Paige
published 3.5
3.12
Kelly McCool
published
2.91
Agatha Asemota
published 3
2.85
Katherine Sentilles
published
2.82
Susan Northen-Lacy
published
Angela Burkes
published 3
2.70
Cheryl Body
published 3
2.69
Madeline Bray
published
2.47
WENDY Vines
published
2.23
Demetrius Boyland
published 2.5
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.

Susan Northen-Lacy + Bradi Bair15658% games+0.4% vs expected
Kelly McCool + Gail Paige101449% games−0.6% vs expected
Cheryl Body + Agatha Asemota4642% games−10.7% vs expected
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.

Natalie Taylor
39W–28L career · 7 lines in 2022
41%59%<1%
3.53
3.5
Bradi Bair
67W–22L career · no lines in 2022
<1%75%25%
3.41
3.5
Gail Paige
17W–27L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.21
Kelly McCool
13W–25L career · no lines in 2022
18%82%<1%
3.12
3
Agatha Asemota
20W–34L career · no lines in 2022
<1%76%24%
2.91
Katherine Sentilles
37W–32L career · no lines in 2022
<1%88%12%
2.85
Susan Northen-Lacy
49W–54L career · no lines in 2022
1%91%8%
2.82
3
Angela Burkes
7W–7L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Cheryl Body
18W–54L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
2.70
Madeline Bray
21W–12L career · no lines in 2022
7%92%1%
2.69
WENDY Vines
52W–79L career · no lines in 2022
0%59%41%
2.47
2.5
Demetrius Boyland
15W–22L career · no lines in 2022
0%98%2%
2.23

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.