Teams

KCrosby/KMartin (Sardis)

2026 Combo Doubles 18 & Over League · 18 & Over Combo 8.5 Women

14 players · average NTRP 4.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 upcoming · 5 played
Sep 8 8:00 PM
Queens Sports Complex at Marion Diehl Park
Sep 15 7:00 PM
vs
Sardis Swim & Racquet Club
Sep 22 8:00 PM
vs
Queens Sports Complex at Marion Diehl Park
Sep 29 7:00 PM
vs
Sardis Swim & Racquet Club
Oct 6 7:00 PM
vs
Sardis Swim & Racquet Club
2026-09-01vs JBlack (Queens)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesJulia Knight / Sheila Walsh vs Betsy Hartman / Krista Wainscott2-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesKathryn Martin / Katie Kelleher vs Madeline Weih / Chelse Stevens6-7, 4-6
L#3 DoublesKatie Crosby / Sophie Lanham vs Amanda Patrocino / Julian Black3-6, 1-6
2026-08-25vs DWest (Queens)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesTinsley Birchfield / Peggy Hoffman vs Austin Taylor / Jackie Gaine1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesRebecca Self / Kathryn Martin vs Kristen Oliver / Xersalyn Threet6-3, 1-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMary Toomy / Julie Hollifield vs Maria Emilia de la Orden / Lorna Doucette2-6, 5-7
2026-08-23vs JGardiner (OPRC)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesKatie Kelleher / Sophie Pollak vs Eryn Ratcliffe / Suzy Johnson6-4, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesSophie Lanham / Kathryn Martin vs Stuart Pfeifer / Tylee Kessler4-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesMadeline Jurch / Julia Knight vs Carolyn Drake / Caroline Pickup6-2, 2-6, 1-0
2026-08-18vs WParker (Queens)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesKatie Kelleher / Sheila Walsh vs Wendy Parker / Jennifer Watson2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesTinsley Birchfield / Mary Toomy vs MAGDALENA STUDENOVSKY / Nancy Miller2-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesSarah Fenwick / Katie Crosby vs Caroline Frank / Rachael Schuler1-6, 3-6
2026-08-17vs CKahm/ASherrill (Queens)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesSarah Fenwick / Mary Toomy vs Lina Clarke / Andi Boston1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesKathryn Martin / Madeline Jurch vs Alison Lacy Sherrill / Lane Merlo3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJulia Knight / Katie Crosby vs Meaghan Ahern / Elizabeth Moss6-1, 6-4
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 standings13 teams · 18 & Over Combo 8.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1TBasinger (CSRC)2060129
2FOno/TGreen (Chestnut Square Park)2051332
3JBlack (Queens)2051452
4CKahm/ASherrill (Queens)2042550
5MMiller (Queens)1021222
6DConrad/SSmulktis (Park Road)1021223
7WParker (Queens)1142445
8JGardiner (OPRC)1142564
9AAugustine/Titlestad (OPRC)1133751
10WJourdan (PPRSC)1124960
11HPhelps (Bridgehampton)0224954
12KCrosby/KMartin (Sardis)02151065
13AStein (Ballantyne CC)02151172

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 3.72 estimated across 11 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.

3.98
Sheila Walsh
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.83
Katie Crosby
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.79
Mary Toomy
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.77
Rebecca Self
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.75
Peggy Hoffman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.74
Sarah Fenwick
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.70
Madeline Jurch
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.67
Sophie Pollak
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.66
Kathryn Martin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.58
Julie Hollifield
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.49
Julia Knight
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Katie Kelleher
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Sophie Lanham
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Tinsley Birchfield
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Kathryn Martin + Katie Crosby5258% games+13.3% vs expected
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.

Sheila Walsh
15W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%57%43%
3.98
Katie Crosby
33W–19L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%<1%>99%
3.83
4
Mary Toomy
6W–15L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.79
Rebecca Self
4W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
3%92%5%
3.77
Peggy Hoffman
12W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.75
Sarah Fenwick
5W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.74
4
Madeline Jurch
48W–46L career · 3 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.70
4
Sophie Pollak
18W–38L career · 2 lines in 2026
12%88%1%
3.67
Kathryn Martin
23W–15L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.66
4
Julie Hollifield
102W–113L career · 2 lines in 2026
28%72%<1%
3.58
Julia Knight
5W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
3.49
Katie Kelleher
48W–22L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sophie Lanham
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Tinsley Birchfield
0W–7L career · 2 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.