Teams

Fernstrom/Rogers/SVCC

2026 Mixed 40 & Over 3.5, 4.5 · 4.5 Mixed

10 players · average NTRP 4.25 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-08-02vs Mitchell/Bentonville/INDSplit 11
W#1 DoublesAllison van Matre / Hayes Shimp vs Tihomir Buncic / Shailyn Abbott8-4
L#2 DoublesAustin Lasater / Emily Saffran vs Cassie Dyer / Samuel Jackson3-8
2026-08-02vs Mitchell/Bentonville/INDSplit 11
W#1 DoublesEmily Saffran / Austin Lasater vs Tihomir Buncic / Shailyn Abbott8-5
L#2 DoublesJustin Purkey / Jazmin Taylor vs Cassie Dyer / Samuel Jackson6-8
2026-08-02vs Mitchell/Bentonville/INDWon 20
W#1 DoublesThea Fernstrom / Joshua Saffran vs Rebecca White / John Hysell8-3
W#2 DoublesGordon Goldstein / Tracey Wren vs David Montoya / Stephanie Murphy8-2
2026-08-02vs Mitchell/Bentonville/INDWon 20
W#1 DoublesTracey Wren / Gordon Goldstein vs John Hysell / Rebecca White8-2
W#2 DoublesThea Fernstrom / Joshua Saffran vs Lacey Mitchell / David Montoya8-2
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 4.5 Mixed 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 4.09 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.

4.39
Joshua Saffran
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.28
Thea Fernstrom
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.23
Jazmin Taylor
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
4.23
Tracey Wren
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
4.15
Justin Purkey
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
4.15
Gordon Goldstein
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
4.13
Allison van Matre
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.01
Emily Saffran
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.71
Austin Lasater
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.62
Hayes Shimp
usually #1 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.

Thea Fernstrom + Joshua Saffran404 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.

Joshua Saffran
8W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%77%22%
4.39
Thea Fernstrom
20W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%92%5%
4.28
Jazmin Taylor
12W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
5%92%3%
4.23
Tracey Wren
5W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
4.23
Justin Purkey
2W–4L career · 1 line in 2026
14%86%1%
4.15
Gordon Goldstein
5W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
14%85%1%
4.15
4.5
Allison van Matre
11W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
18%82%<1%
4.13
Emily Saffran
9W–11L career · 2 lines in 2026
47%53%<1%
4.01
4
Austin Lasater
10W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.71
Hayes Shimp
13W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.62

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.