Teams

4S: Combo 5.5: Debnath

2026 SCT Adult 18 & Over COMBO (Women) - Fall · 5.5 Women - 1

15 players · average NTRP 2.75 / SOUTHERN CONNECTICUT

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 →
Schedule6 played
W#1 DoublesShannon Wten / Lori Barshop vs Emily Weber / Andrea Calabrese6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesNixali Zvezdin / Anna Hertzman vs Deirdre Fletcher / Meg Maise6-7, 6-1, 1-0
L#3 DoublesEmma Paradis / Michele Conklin vs Katie Ferguson / Kimberly Fox5-7, 2-6
L#1 DoublesEmi Mills / Pallavi Debnath vs Christina Mink / Laura Hotchkiss4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesNixali Zvezdin / Michele Conklin vs Sarah Richardson / Astrid Alvarez Clavijo2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesEmma Paradis / Carolina Asmussen vs Annmarie Maguire / Tami Siriwardene3-6, 2-6
W#1 DoublesShannon Wten / Anna Hertzman vs Kathy Knapp / Meg Maise6-0, 6-2
L#2 DoublesJessie Knopp / Katy Lockhart vs Valerie de Stefanis / Andrea Calabrese5-7, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesEmma Paradis / Michele Conklin vs Nora King / Kimberly Fox6-4, 6-2
W#1 DoublesEmi Mills / Amy Holt vs Melissa Salvatore / Nancy Day6-2, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJessie Knopp / Laura Connell vs Paige Couture / Kimberly Grosso2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesJaime Booth / Carolina Asmussen vs Annmarie Maguire / Suzanne Bartek7-5, 6-1
W#1 DoublesEmi Mills / Meagan Brody vs Donna Sargeantson / Andrea Calabrese6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesShannon Wten / Lori Barshop vs Katie Ferguson / Kimberly Fox6-3, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJessie Knopp / Pallavi Debnath vs Nancy Murphy / Meg Maise3-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#1 DoublesJaime Booth / Amy Holt vs Nancy Day / Noreen Wenig6-3, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesEmi Mills / Laura Connell vs Laura Hotchkiss / Christina Spizzirri6-4, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesNixali Zvezdin / Pallavi Debnath vs Maude Ancone / Loralie Held2-6, 6-3, 1-0
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 · 5.5 Women - 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1TRC: Serve It Up:Spizzirri/Richardson0613513132
24S: Combo 5.5: Debnath069922153
34S:Havin' a Ball!:Ferguson/Sargeantson0651329195

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 2.36 estimated across 13 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.

2.88
Emi Mills
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.82
Emma Paradis
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.76
Shannon Wten
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.61
Jaime Booth
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3
2.43
Amy Holt
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.42
Katy Lockhart
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.32
Lori Barshop
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.27
Jessie Knopp
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.20
Anna Hertzman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.05
Michele Conklin
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.04
Carolina Asmussen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
1.98
Laura Connell
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
1.96
Pallavi Debnath
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Meagan Brody
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Nixali Zvezdin
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Emi Mills + Meagan Brody7080% games+20.8% vs expected
Lori Barshop + Pallavi Debnath3347% games−0.2% vs expected
Pallavi Debnath + Laura Connell1433% games−10.7% vs expected
Pallavi Debnath + Jaime Booth3449% gamesnot enough data
Pallavi Debnath + Emi Mills314 matchesnot enough data
Lori Barshop + Shannon Wten303 matchesnot enough data
Lori Barshop + Laura Connell123 matchesnot enough data
Pallavi Debnath + Anna Hertzman033 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.

3
Emi Mills
30W–6L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
2.88
3
Emma Paradis
1W–2L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
1%91%8%
2.82
Shannon Wten
25W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%95%3%
2.76
3
Jaime Booth
51W–50L career · 6 lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
2.61
2.5
Amy Holt
12W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%71%29%
2.43
Katy Lockhart
9W–11L career · 1 line in 2026
0%72%28%
2.42
Lori Barshop
20W–29L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%92%8%
2.32
Jessie Knopp
1W–15L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%96%4%
2.27
2.5
Anna Hertzman
6W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.20
Michele Conklin
5W–14L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.05
2.5
Carolina Asmussen
1W–6L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.04
Laura Connell
8W–24L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.98
Pallavi Debnath
19W–73L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.96
Meagan Brody
7W–0L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Nixali Zvezdin
3W–4L career · 3 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.