Teams

JBlack/MParker (Queens)

2024 Combo Doubles 18 & Over League · 18 & Over 8.5 Women

15 players · average NTRP 4.39 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2024-10-07vs SReynolds (Queens)Won 20
W#2 DoublesMadison Lohnes / Betsy Hartman vs Debbie Titlestad / Monica Erb6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesAna Bolson / Meredith Sweeney vs Colleen Hickman / Kim Cochran6-2, 3-6, 1-0
2024-10-01vs JGardiner (OPRC)Won 21
L#1 DoublesChelse Stevens / Madison Lohnes vs Suzy Johnson / Eryn Ratcliffe4-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesMeghan Bartholomew / Amanda Patrocino vs Amy Augustine / Jennifer Gardiner6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesKrista Wainscott / Ana Bolson vs Stuart Pfeifer / Carolyn Drake6-2, 6-4
2024-09-17vs WParker/RSchuler (Mason Wallace)Split 11
W#2 DoublesKimberly Diaz / Madison Lohnes vs Diana West / Cassandra Wincek6-1, 7-6
L#3 DoublesMeghan Bartholomew / Meredith Sweeney vs Jennifer Watson / Claire Lieberman7-5, 4-6, 0-1
2024-09-10vs ATaylor (Queens)Split 11
W#2 DoublesChelse Stevens / Madison Lohnes vs Austin Taylor / Christine Kahm6-3, 6-2
L#3 DoublesAnna Sharp / Christina McWilliams vs Sarah Schweppe / Sheila Walsh4-6, 6-7
2024-09-03vs SReynolds (Queens)Won 20
W#2 DoublesMeredith Sweeney / Meghan Bartholomew vs Caroline Pickup / Morgan Scruggs6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesChelse Stevens / Mary Peterson vs Jenni Beasley / Megan Griffin7-6, 4-6, 1-0
2024-08-27vs MAhern (Palisades CC)Split 11
L#1 DoublesJulian Black / Meghan Bartholomew vs Jordan Bowers / Megan Hunter4-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMadison Lohnes / Betsy Hartman vs Jessica Varn / Linda Beaton7-5, 6-1
2024-08-20vs CStaton (Park Road)Won 20
W#1 DoublesKimberly Diaz / Madison Lohnes vs Claudia Bareis / CJ Rummelsburg6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAmanda Patrocino / Meredith Sweeney vs Beverly Harrell / Kristen Oliver6-2, 6-2
2024-08-13vs JGardiner (OPRC)Lost 02
L#1 DoublesMadison Lohnes / Lauren Mulcahy vs Tylee Kessler / Lisa Kane3-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesAnna Sharp / Christina McWilliams vs Eryn Ratcliffe / Suzy Johnson4-6, 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 standings for 18 & Over 8.5 Women 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 4.07 estimated across 15 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.

4.60
Meghan Bartholomew
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 5
4.33
Madison Lohnes
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published 4.5
4.29
Kimberly Diaz
published
4.18
Ana Bolson
published 4.5
4.17
Betsy Hartman
published 4.5
4.15
Amanda Patrocino
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 4.5
4.12
Anna Sharp
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.08
Lauren Mulcahy
published
4.08
Meredith Sweeney
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
4.00
Mary Peterson
published
3.96
Chelse Stevens
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #3 Doubles 14% · published 4
3.92
3.86
Julian Black
published
3.83
Krista Wainscott
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.49
Mary Parker
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.

Meredith Sweeney + Amanda Patrocino9265% games+15.0% vs expected
Madison Lohnes + Kimberly Diaz5166% games+13.6% vs expected
Kimberly Diaz + Lauren Mulcahy5258% games+8.8% vs expected
Christina McWilliams + Krista Wainscott10559% games+8.6% vs expected
Amanda Patrocino + Meghan Bartholomew7459% games+7.3% vs expected
Madison Lohnes + Betsy Hartman4256% games+2.5% vs expected
Amanda Patrocino + Chelse Stevens5256% games+0.4% vs expected
Julian Black + Krista Wainscott134 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.

5
Meghan Bartholomew
66W–46L career · 7 lines in 2024
21%78%<1%
4.60
4.5
Madison Lohnes
73W–37L career · 7 lines in 2024
1%90%9%
4.33
Kimberly Diaz
32W–22L career · no lines in 2024
1%93%5%
4.29
4.5
Ana Bolson
7W–11L career · no lines in 2024
8%91%1%
4.18
4.5
Betsy Hartman
14W–12L career · no lines in 2024
9%90%1%
4.17
4.5
Amanda Patrocino
176W–39L career · 5 lines in 2024
12%88%<1%
4.15
4.5
Anna Sharp
62W–39L career · 2 lines in 2024
18%82%<1%
4.12
Lauren Mulcahy
28W–21L career · no lines in 2024
26%74%<1%
4.08
Meredith Sweeney
94W–52L career · 4 lines in 2024
27%73%<1%
4.08
Mary Peterson
25W–15L career · no lines in 2024
50%50%<1%
4.00
4
Chelse Stevens
136W–81L career · 7 lines in 2024
<1%62%38%
3.96
4
Christina McWilliams
46W–31L career · no lines in 2024
<1%73%27%
3.92
Julian Black
54W–28L career · no lines in 2024
<1%86%13%
3.86
4
Krista Wainscott
190W–89L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%90%9%
3.83
Mary Parker
8W–19L career · no lines in 2024
54%46%<1%
3.49

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.