Teams

Fullilove - NC - Oxford

2025 Mixed 18&Over-NC · 3.0 Mixed

8 players · average NTRP 3.50 / MISSISSIPPI

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
2025-07-08vs Bray - NC - SouthavenWon 20
W#1 DoublesKathlene Poulelis / Heath Fullilove vs Jennifer Larkin / Corey Richter6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAshley Brewer / Landon Fullilove vs Brittany Crain / David Bray6-2, 6-2
2025-07-01vs Bray - NC - SouthavenWon 20
W#1 DoublesLandon Fullilove / Ashley Brewer vs Corey Richter / Jennifer Larkin6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesHeath Fullilove / Kathlene Poulelis vs David Bray / Sonja Dickey6-1, 6-1
2025-06-24vs Young-NC-SouthavenLost 12
L#1 DoublesVicki Lindsay / Heath Fullilove vs Houstyn Loosier / Eric Barnes6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesRalph Banks / Lindsay Banks vs Shea Young / Zane Coleman3-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesAshley Brewer / Landon Fullilove vs Maggie Neal / Keegan Coleman6-1, 6-2
2025-06-10vs Young-NC-SouthavenWon 30
W#1 DoublesCashe Shows / Vicki Lindsay vs Madeline Johnson / Keegan Coleman6-0, 6-2
W#2 DoublesHeath Fullilove / Kathlene Poulelis vs Maggie Neal / Tony Neal6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAshley Brewer / Bill Clark vs Zane Coleman / Houstyn Loosier5-7, 7-6, 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 3.0 Mixed 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 2.91 estimated across 6 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.

3.44
Cashe Shows
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.01
Bill Clark
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.94
Heath Fullilove
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.88
Vicki Lindsay
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.77
Kathlene Poulelis
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.44
Lindsay Banks
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Landon Fullilove
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Ralph Banks
usually #2 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.

Kathlene Poulelis + Heath Fullilove7264% games+13.0% 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.

3.5
Cashe Shows
18W–2L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%65%35%
3.44
3.5
Bill Clark
18W–12L career · 1 line in 2025
46%54%<1%
3.01
Heath Fullilove
18W–10L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%66%34%
2.94
Vicki Lindsay
37W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
2.88
Kathlene Poulelis
37W–21L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%3%97%
2.77
Lindsay Banks
10W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
0%67%33%
2.44
Landon Fullilove
3W–0L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Ralph Banks
0W–1L 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.