Teams

WI Combo 8.5W MALT Woods

2026 WI Combo · WI Combo 8.5 Women

9 players · average NTRP 4.00 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-27vs WI Combo 8.5W MALT BaugusLost 12
W#1 DoublesEmily King / Emma Lai vs Morgan Lee / Jacqueline Brady7-5, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesNatalie Blonien / Deb Parman vs Amberlee Baugus / Megan Prahl4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesLisa Sanchez / Susan Addamo vs Sydney Verbauwhede / Julia Hazenberg3-6, 1-6
2026-08-25vs WI Combo 8.5W MALT BatheLost 12
W#1 DoublesZoe Tesone / Emily King vs Jessie Bathe / Morgan Wilson6-3, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesLisa Sanchez / Natalie Blonien vs Renee Nelson / Gina Kolpek2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesDebra Woods / Holly Barnish vs Patricia VanVoorhees / Karen Grimmer4-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-08-06vs WI Combo 8.5W MALT BaugusLost 03
L#1 DoublesEmily King / Emma Lai vs Samantha Saetang / Megan Prahl3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesNatalie Blonien / Debra Woods vs Michelle Tallentyre / Joanna Fisch4-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesDeb Parman / Susan Addamo vs Gillian Drier / Christina Price2-6, 0-6
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 standings3 teams · WI Combo 8.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Combo 8.5W MALT Baugus1030013
2WI Combo 8.5W MALT Bathe000000
3WI Combo 8.5W MALT Woods0103636

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 3.73 estimated across 8 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.

4.04
Zoe Tesone
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.93
Emily King
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.85
Emma Lai
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.77
Holly Barnish
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Debra Woods
published 4
3.73
Natalie Blonien
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.65
Deb Parman
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.58
Lisa Sanchez
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.33
Susan Addamo
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Deb Parman + Natalie Blonien3248% games+4.8% vs expected
Debra Woods + Holly Barnish4549% games+3.8% vs expected
Emma Lai + Emily King8253% games−0.1% vs expected
Lisa Sanchez + Susan Addamo71740% games−10.1% vs expected
Emily King + Zoe Tesone404 matchesnot enough data
Lisa Sanchez + Deb Parman213 matchesnot enough data
Lisa Sanchez + Natalie Blonien213 matchesnot enough data
Deb Parman + Susan Addamo123 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.

Zoe Tesone
65W–27L career · 4 lines in 2026
40%60%<1%
4.04
Emily King
53W–20L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%70%30%
3.93
Emma Lai
29W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%85%14%
3.85
Holly Barnish
27W–15L career · 1 line in 2026
3%92%5%
3.77
4
Debra Woods
11W–10L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Natalie Blonien
26W–29L career · 3 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Deb Parman
22W–35L career · 2 lines in 2026
15%84%1%
3.65
Lisa Sanchez
20W–28L career · 2 lines in 2026
28%72%<1%
3.58
Susan Addamo
16W–49L career · 2 lines in 2026
89%11%<1%
3.33

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.