Teams

Deupree/Memphis

2024 Combo 18 & Over - Memphis · 8.5 18 & Over Women

15 players · average NTRP 4.43 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2024-09-17vs Hecht/MemphisWon 30
W#1 DoublesCatherine Cowart / Jeanne Hollis vs Jenny Branston / Silvia Hecht7-6, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMegan Grinder / Whitney Bricken vs Patricia Dewey / Deana Templeton6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesPalmer Smith / Elizabeth Garrott vs Lee Anne Futrell / Elizabeth Woodmansee6-3, 6-1
2024-09-10vs Hecht/MemphisSplit 11
W#1 DoublesCourtney Monaghan / Elizabeth Garrott vs Deana Templeton / Hala Hakim6-4, 6-4
L#2 DoublesWhitney Bricken / Laura Stafford vs Patricia Dewey / Jenny Branston1-6, 2-6
2024-08-27vs Hecht/MemphisWon 21
W#1 DoublesCaroline Smith / Elizabeth Garrott vs Vail Gates / Katharine Schuler6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesCourtney Monaghan / Whitney Bricken vs Hala Hakim / Silvia Hecht5-7, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesCatherine Cowart / Melissa Reddoch vs Patricia Dewey / Jenny Branston6-4, 4-6, 0-1
2024-08-20vs Hecht/MemphisWon 30
W#1 DoublesEmily Robbins / Palmer Burt vs Patricia Dewey / Silvia Hecht7-6, 6-4
W#2 DoublesPalmer Smith / Laura Stafford vs Lee Anne Futrell / Jenny Branston6-3, 6-2
W#3 DoublesAlicia Harwood Baker / Melissa Reddoch vs Vail Gates / Deana Templeton7-6, 6-3
2024-08-13vs Hecht/MemphisWon 30
W#1 DoublesCaroline Smith / Laura Stafford vs Vail Gates / Silvia Hecht6-3, 7-6
W#2 DoublesAlicia Harwood Baker / Whitney Bricken vs Lu Schneider / Katharine Schuler6-3, 6-0
W#3 DoublesAshley Robinson / Angie Deupree vs Patricia Dewey / Dana Deviney6-2, 6-1
2024-08-06vs Hecht/MemphisWon 21
W#1 DoublesEmily Robbins / Palmer Burt vs Lee Anne Futrell / Deana Templeton6-2, 7-6
W#2 DoublesCourtney Monaghan / Elizabeth Garrott vs Patricia Dewey / Jenny Branston6-4, 6-3
L#3 DoublesAlicia Harwood Baker / Jeanne Hollis vs Vail Gates / Elizabeth Woodmansee0-6, 6-3, 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 standings8 teams · 8.5 18 & Over Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Smith/Memphis6215923194
2Deupree/Memphis511449136
3Baker/Memphis5315924205
4Moore/Memphis5315925204
5Tayloe/Memphis44111330231
6Dertien/Memphis3591535248
7Hecht/Memphis1541431204
8Echols/Memphis1771735247

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 3.84 estimated across 10 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.

4.42
Frances Lawhead
published 4.5
Alicia Harwood Baker
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
Ashley Robinson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
Emily Robbins
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.13
Courtney Monaghan
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.08
Angie Deupree
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 4.5
4.01
Megan Grinder
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.87
Elizabeth Garrott
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.70
Laura Stafford
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.70
Whitney Bricken
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.57
Melissa Reddoch
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.43
Jeanne Hollis
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.43
Palmer Burt
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Catherine Cowart
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Palmer Smith
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · 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 Stafford + Whitney Bricken221157% games−0.4% vs expected
Laura Stafford + Melissa Reddoch2346% games−3.3% vs expected
Courtney Monaghan + Megan Grinder134 matchesnot enough data
Whitney Bricken + Palmer Smith303 matchesnot enough data
Whitney Bricken + Courtney Monaghan213 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.

4.5
Frances Lawhead
27W–6L career · type A · no lines in 2024
<1%73%27%
4.42
4.5
Alicia Harwood Baker
2W–3L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
4.5
Ashley Robinson
1W–4L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
4.5
Emily Robbins
2W–0L career · type S · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
4.5
Courtney Monaghan
12W–8L career · 3 lines in 2024
16%84%<1%
4.13
4.5
Angie Deupree
57W–13L career · 5 lines in 2024
26%74%<1%
4.08
Megan Grinder
5W–9L career · 1 line in 2024
45%55%<1%
4.01
4
Elizabeth Garrott
21W–11L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%83%17%
3.87
Laura Stafford
27W–22L career · 3 lines in 2024
6%93%1%
3.70
Whitney Bricken
35W–21L career · 4 lines in 2024
6%93%1%
3.70
Melissa Reddoch
7W–12L career · 4 lines in 2024
30%70%<1%
3.57
Jeanne Hollis
16W–11L career · 2 lines in 2024
70%30%<1%
3.43
Palmer Burt
20W–18L career · 4 lines in 2024
70%30%<1%
3.43
Catherine Cowart
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Palmer Smith
6W–2L career · 2 lines in 2024
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.