Teams

Martin - Lawn and Tennis 4.5/4.0/3.5

2026 Sandhills Tri Level 40 & over · 4.5

11 players · average NTRP 3.79 / NORTH CAROLINA

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
2026-06-07vs Stevens - CCNCWon 30
W#1 DoublesChristina McKenzie / Rebecca Meyer vs Robin McClymont / Ellen Tarry3-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKatrina Bullard / Susan Omell vs Mary Hannah Vaughan / Amy Moubry7-5, 2-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAnn Tucker / Amity Aldridge vs Shannon Allison / Lindsay Blackwood6-3, 6-4
2026-06-07vs Stevens - CCNCWon 10
W#1 DoublesChristina McKenzie / Rebecca Meyer vs Kathy Channell / Christy Clark7-6, 4-6, 1-0
2026-06-06vs Stevens - CCNCSplit 11
L#1 DoublesChristina McKenzie / Rebecca Meyer vs Robin McClymont / Christy Clark6-3, 2-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAnn Tucker / Amity Aldridge vs Caroline Parks / Lindsay Blackwood6-4, 6-0
2026-06-06vs Stevens - CCNCSplit 11
W#1 DoublesChristina McKenzie / Jennifer Mays vs Ellen Tarry / Kathy Channell1-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesAnn Tucker / Amity Aldridge vs Caroline Parks / Courtney McGuirt6-7, 6-1, 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 standings2 teams · 4.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Martin - Lawn and Tennis 4.5/4.0/3.5409311108
2Stevens - CCNC043920122

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 3.61 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.

4.22
Christina McKenzie
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.83
Nannette Goodwin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.70
Katrina Bullard
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.63
Jennifer Mays
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.63
Susan Omell
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.60
Joy Martin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.59
Ann Tucker
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.34
Amity Aldridge
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.29
Sajata Strong
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.22
Lisa Nixon
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Rebecca Meyer
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.

Ann Tucker + Amity Aldridge6656% games+6.3% vs expected
Joy Martin + Nannette Goodwin7156% games+6.3% vs expected
Amity Aldridge + Sajata Strong8553% games−0.2% vs expected
Joy Martin + Susan Omell4646% games−4.1% vs expected
Katrina Bullard + Susan Omell7252% games−12.6% vs expected
Susan Omell + Sajata Strong8947% gamesnot enough data
Lisa Nixon + Amity Aldridge5745% gamesnot enough data
Christina McKenzie + Ann Tucker9165% gamesnot 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
Christina McKenzie
50W–28L career · 4 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
4.22
4
Nannette Goodwin
313W–205L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.83
Katrina Bullard
23W–16L career · 3 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
3.70
Jennifer Mays
70W–42L career · 2 lines in 2026
16%84%<1%
3.63
4
Susan Omell
189W–248L career · 3 lines in 2026
17%83%<1%
3.63
Joy Martin
56W–80L career · 4 lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.60
3.5
Ann Tucker
64W–37L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%25%75%
3.59
3.5
Amity Aldridge
113W–101L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%89%10%
3.34
3.5
Sajata Strong
108W–88L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%93%6%
3.29
3.5
Lisa Nixon
100W–156L career · 3 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.22
Rebecca Meyer
6W–4L career · no 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.