Teams

Samuell Grand/Thornton-Musick W4.0S

2026 DALLAS TENNIS N · A 18 & Over ADULT Fall W. Sunday

26 players · average NTRP 4.00 / TEXAS

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 →
Schedule2 played
2025-11-02vs Canyon Creek/Gooch W4.0SWon 10
W#2 DoublesErica Whiteway / Cassi Cole vs Kerrie Davis / Sheila Sergiovanni7-6, 7-5
2025-10-19Won 10
W#1 DoublesAndrea Taylor / Cassi Cole vs Lea Plamann / Lauren Sheaks7-5, 2-6, 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 standings for A 18 & Over ADULT Fall W. Sunday 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 3.79 estimated across 26 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
Alexandra Northington
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.02
Sarah Sparling
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
4.01
Meg Lohr
usually #1 Singles 56%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published
4.01
Jill Montgomery
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
4.00
Laura Reynolds
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.98
Laura Lusk
usually #1 Singles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published
3.95
Liza Ellis
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.92
Michelle Marketos
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
3.88
Maureen McCaffrey
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.85
Bridget Goldman
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.80
Lisa Nammari
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.79
Ann Thornton
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.78
Marci Addington
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.75
Louise Bexley
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
3.73
Tricia Roos
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.72
Andrea Taylor
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.72
Amanda Craft
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.71
Suzanne Flournoy
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.70
Courtney Kunz
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.68
Christine Rogers
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.66
Tanya Musick
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.65
Tory Redington-Chauza
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.63
Erica Whiteway
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.58
Leah Oliver
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.45
Amelia White
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.42
Cassi Cole
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
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.

Christine Rogers + Tanya Musick8259% games+9.5% vs expected
Ann Thornton + Laura Reynolds11366% games+9.4% vs expected
Tricia Roos + Louise Bexley7557% games+2.1% vs expected
Lisa Nammari + Suzanne Flournoy4261% games−6.4% vs expected
Tanya Musick + Sarah Sparling4356% gamesnot enough data
Christine Rogers + Erica Whiteway2453% gamesnot enough data
Cassi Cole + Erica Whiteway3255% gamesnot enough data
Tory Redington-Chauza + Michelle Marketos4167% 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
Alexandra Northington
15W–9L career · 8 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
4.22
Sarah Sparling
17W–6L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%44%56%
4.02
Meg Lohr
35W–8L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%47%53%
4.01
Jill Montgomery
17W–20L career · 12 lines in 2026
48%52%<1%
4.01
Laura Reynolds
19W–4L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%51%49%
4.00
Laura Lusk
10W–11L career · 7 lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
3.98
Liza Ellis
6W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%65%35%
3.95
Michelle Marketos
20W–12L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%72%27%
3.92
Maureen McCaffrey
20W–10L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
3.88
4
Bridget Goldman
15W–6L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%84%15%
3.85
Lisa Nammari
25W–10L career · 8 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.80
4
Ann Thornton
30W–9L career · 5 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.79
Marci Addington
7W–11L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.78
Louise Bexley
21W–7L career · 5 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.75
Tricia Roos
19W–11L career · 7 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Andrea Taylor
51W–18L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.72
4
Amanda Craft
14W–6L career · 5 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.72
Suzanne Flournoy
11W–7L career · 6 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.71
4
Courtney Kunz
10W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
8%91%2%
3.70
4
Christine Rogers
14W–9L career · 4 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.68
Tanya Musick
17W–11L career · 6 lines in 2026
13%86%1%
3.66
Tory Redington-Chauza
5W–7L career · 4 lines in 2026
13%86%1%
3.65
Erica Whiteway
33W–17L career · 5 lines in 2026
18%82%<1%
3.63
Leah Oliver
11W–12L career · 6 lines in 2026
29%71%<1%
3.58
3.5
Amelia White
14W–13L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%63%37%
3.45
4
Cassi Cole
9W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
72%28%<1%
3.42

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.