Teams

The Nelson/Schmitz-Arnold W3.5S

2026 DALLAS TENNIS 18 & Over ADULT S · S W. Saturday League

23 players · average NTRP 3.39 / TEXAS

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 →
Schedule4 played
2026-06-06Won 10
W#2 DoublesAmber James / Lora Thomas vs Chelsea Northam / Tammi Cole7-6, 6-4
2026-05-30Lost 01
L#2 SinglesMimi Mansour vs Helen Chang1-6, 0-6
2026-05-16vs Samuell Grand/ Leary W3.5SSplit 11
L#2 DoublesClare Holbrook / Mimi Mansour vs Kanmani Govardhanan / Katie Baudoin3-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesLora Thomas / Nicole Schoemaker vs Shika Thakuria / Vanessa Wade6-1, 6-4
2026-05-09vs Bob Day TC/Slote W3.5SLost 01
L#2 DoublesMandi Schmitz / Kaitlyn Scott vs Jeanette Johnson / Eva Hines5-7, 7-5, 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 S W. Saturday League 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 3.21 estimated across 21 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.

3.54
Vesna Gray
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.52
Heather Perkins
usually #1 Singles 36%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published 3.5
3.51
Chasti Gest
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.48
Carrie Neale
usually #1 Singles 79%, also #2 Singles 14% · published 3.5
3.45
Denelle Alexander
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.39
Anne Givens
usually #2 Doubles 63%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.33
Silvia Tapia
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.30
Clare Holbrook
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.28
Christine Babcock
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 17% · published 3.5
3.24
Julie Harner
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.18
Leah Arnold
published
3.18
Lora Thomas
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.15
Lorena Noguera Rivello
usually #1 Singles 54%, also #1 Doubles 23% · published
3.15
Zareen Brendel
usually #2 Doubles 38%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
3.12
Mandi Schmitz
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #2 Singles 29% · published
3.08
Shereen Yasin
published
3.04
Lorinda Nelson
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
3.02
Amber James
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
3.00
Mimi Mansour
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.78
Alexis Prochnow
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published 3
2.68
Julie Visconsi
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Kaitlyn Scott
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Nicole Schoemaker
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 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.

Vesna Gray + Clare Holbrook11659% games+8.9% vs expected
Chasti Gest + Anne Givens13559% games+2.2% vs expected
Anne Givens + Silvia Tapia0734% games−10.9% vs expected
Amber James + Julie Harner3251% gamesnot enough data
Mandi Schmitz + Leah Arnold2355% gamesnot enough data
Lorinda Nelson + Lorena Noguera Rivello404 matchesnot enough data
Mandi Schmitz + Mimi Mansour404 matchesnot enough data
Leah Arnold + Carrie Neale404 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.

Vesna Gray
13W–8L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%39%61%
3.54
3.5
Heather Perkins
33W–21L career · 11 lines in 2026
<1%43%57%
3.52
3.5
Chasti Gest
49W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%48%52%
3.51
3.5
Carrie Neale
55W–16L career · 14 lines in 2026
<1%55%44%
3.48
3.5
Denelle Alexander
35W–18L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%65%35%
3.45
3.5
Anne Givens
39W–30L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.39
Silvia Tapia
16W–34L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.33
3.5
Clare Holbrook
19W–12L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%93%6%
3.30
3.5
Christine Babcock
23W–4L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%94%5%
3.28
Julie Harner
15W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%94%2%
3.24
Leah Arnold
27W–6L career · no lines in 2026
<1%8%92%
3.18
Lora Thomas
10W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
9%91%1%
3.18
Lorena Noguera Rivello
36W–10L career · 13 lines in 2026
<1%13%87%
3.15
Zareen Brendel
17W–4L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%13%87%
3.15
Mandi Schmitz
25W–17L career · 7 lines in 2026
18%82%<1%
3.12
Shereen Yasin
1W–3L career · no lines in 2026
28%72%<1%
3.08
Lorinda Nelson
25W–8L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%38%62%
3.04
3
Amber James
24W–11L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%44%56%
3.02
Mimi Mansour
13W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
52%48%<1%
3.00
3
Alexis Prochnow
20W–11L career · 10 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
2.78
Julie Visconsi
6W–6L career · 8 lines in 2026
8%91%1%
2.68
Kaitlyn Scott
12W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Nicole Schoemaker
9W–3L career · 4 lines 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.