Teams

Monte/Spittle/Nashville

2025 Combo 18 & Over - Nashville · 5.5 Women - FRI AM & MON PM

14 players · average NTRP 3.00 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-08-25vs Pendergraft/NashvilleWon 30
W#1 DoublesMary Elizabeth Armor / Olga Jacobsen vs Ashley Kirkland / Jenny Hamrick6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesOlga Spittle / Danielle Anfuso vs Rita Spellings / Katie Claiborne6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesKeira Yu / Lesa Monte vs Margaret Emley / Morgan Estep6-2, 6-0
2025-08-04vs Pendergraft/NashvilleWon 30
W#1 DoublesMarcy Mickiewicz / Ryoko Yamanobe vs Sarah Ann Pendergraft / Elizabeth Derck6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesErica Stepanishen / Jess Lee vs Katie Claiborne / Ashley Kirkland6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesOlga Jacobsen / Jessie Seaman vs Michelle Nealy / Rita Spellings6-0, 6-1
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 5.5 Women - FRI AM & MON PM 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 2.75 estimated across 12 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.

3.26
Claudia Paz
published 3.5
3.12
Erica Stepanishen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.96
Kerry Elam
published
2.95
Jessie Seaman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.90
Olga Spittle
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.82
Laura Monesmith
published
2.65
Jess Lee
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.63
Lesa Monte
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.60
Mary Elizabeth Armor
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.54
Olga Jacobsen
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.48
Keira Yu
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.04
Danielle Anfuso
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
Marcy Mickiewicz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Ryoko Yamanobe
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.

Jessie Seaman + Olga Spittle2551% games+9.7% vs expected
Claudia Paz + Jess Lee314 matchesnot enough data
Olga Spittle + Claudia Paz123 matchesnot enough data
Olga Spittle + Lesa Monte123 matchesnot enough data
Laura Monesmith + Mary Elizabeth Armor123 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.

3.5
Claudia Paz
25W–15L career · no lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.26
Erica Stepanishen
65W–27L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%19%81%
3.12
Kerry Elam
10W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%61%39%
2.96
Jessie Seaman
21W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%64%36%
2.95
Olga Spittle
14W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%76%23%
2.90
Laura Monesmith
15W–16L career · no lines in 2025
1%89%10%
2.82
Jess Lee
17W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
13%86%1%
2.65
Lesa Monte
12W–12L career · 1 line in 2025
18%81%<1%
2.63
Mary Elizabeth Armor
19W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
0%24%76%
2.60
Olga Jacobsen
7W–4L career · 2 lines in 2025
40%60%<1%
2.54
Keira Yu
14W–12L career · 1 line in 2025
0%55%45%
2.48
2.5
Danielle Anfuso
2W–3L career · type S · 1 line in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.04
Marcy Mickiewicz
5W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Ryoko Yamanobe
7W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
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.