Teams

Cave/Greeneville

2026 Adult 18 & Over-Greeneville · 3.5 Women

5 players · average NTRP 3.50 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-05-28vs Roberson/GreenevilleSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLara Neumann / Kathy Joy vs Morgan Mysinger / Jaelyn Moore3-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesPamela Smead / Angela Cutshall vs Neva Kilday / Stephanie Hite6-0, 6-1
2026-05-15Lost 12
W#1 DoublesAngela Cutshall / Pamela Smead vs Beth Catron / Morgan Mysinger3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#1 SinglesVicky Robinson vs Patience Mckeever1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesCarrie Cave / Lara Neumann vs Jaelyn Moore / Katie Roberson0-6, 6-2, 0-1
2026-05-14vs Roberson/GreenevilleLost 13
L#1 DoublesPamela Smead / Angela Cutshall vs Neva Kilday / Jaelyn Moore3-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesVicky Robinson vs Maggie Morelock5-7, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesLara Neumann / Jonna Rhea vs Nikki Pierce / Stephanie Hite6-2, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesCarrie Cave / Barbara Woods vs Patience Mckeever / Chelsea Anderson5-7, 7-5, 0-1
2026-04-30vs Roberson/GreenevilleWon 21
L#1 DoublesAngela Cutshall / Pamela Smead vs Neva Kilday / Morgan Mysinger6-7, 3-6
W#2 DoublesLara Neumann / Christy Mysinger vs Nikki Pierce / Stephanie Hite6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesVicky Robinson / Jonna Rhea vs Katie Roberson / Chelsea Anderson6-4, 6-3
2026-04-16Won 30
W#1 SinglesVicky Robinson vs Chelsea Anderson7-5, 6-0
W#2 DoublesLara Neumann / Joey Ballard vs Maggie Morelock / Nikki Pierce6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCarrie Cave / Barbara Woods vs Katie Roberson / Stephanie Hite6-4, 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 standings2 teams · 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1W Smead/Greeneville2210614122
2Cave/Greeneville2261020147

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 3.21 estimated across 5 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.

3.33
Carrie Cave
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.32
Lara Neumann
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.27
Pamela Smead
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.22
Angela Cutshall
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.93
Vicky Robinson
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #3 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.

Lara Neumann + Angela Cutshall4254% games+5.5% vs expected
Pamela Smead + Angela Cutshall6650% games−2.3% vs expected
Angela Cutshall + Vicky Robinson033 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.

3.5
Carrie Cave
2W–8L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.33
Lara Neumann
8W–4L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%91%8%
3.32
Pamela Smead
9W–15L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Angela Cutshall
14W–16L career · 4 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.22
Vicky Robinson
2W–16L career · 4 lines in 2026
70%30%<1%
2.93

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.