Teams

R A Y B O R N

2025 Combo 55 & Over-SW · Women 6.5

11 players · average NTRP 3.25 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-10-19vs BrookhavenLost 02
L#1 DoublesKathy Manning / Nellie Hopkins vs Faye Santangelo / Tina Roberts2-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesDebbie Bryant / Janell Thames vs Anna Giust / Dwana Wright6-1, 1-6, 0-1
2025-10-16vs BrookhavenWon 21
L#1 DoublesTanza Brown / Polly Moon vs Kelly Perkins / Celeste Carty6-4, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDebbie Bryant / Angelina Vanlandingham vs Anna Giust / Dwana Wright3-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#3 DoublesRhonda Rayborn / Teri Norton vs Faye Santangelo / Tina Roberts7-5, 6-0
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 Women 6.5 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 2.84 estimated across 7 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.

3.23
Angelina Vanlandingham
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.87
Polly Moon
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.85
Debbie Bryant
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.78
Rhonda Rayborn
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.75
Tanza Brown
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.73
Teri Norton
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.66
Kathy Manning
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Janell Thames
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Nellie Hopkins
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Rita Mendrop
published
Sandy Horne
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.

Tanza Brown + Polly Moon2449% games+11.2% vs expected
Rhonda Rayborn + Debbie Bryant1444% games−12.8% vs expected
Teri Norton + Debbie Bryant0523% games−21.5% vs expected
Polly Moon + Debbie Bryant3250% gamesnot enough data
Rhonda Rayborn + Tanza Brown123 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
Angelina Vanlandingham
8W–14L career · 1 line in 2025
5%92%3%
3.23
Polly Moon
35W–26L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%82%17%
2.87
3
Debbie Bryant
18W–38L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%84%15%
2.85
Rhonda Rayborn
5W–14L career · 1 line in 2025
2%92%6%
2.78
Tanza Brown
13W–21L career · 1 line in 2025
3%93%4%
2.75
Teri Norton
2W–23L career · 1 line in 2025
5%92%3%
2.73
Kathy Manning
1W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
99%1%<1%
2.66
Janell Thames
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Nellie Hopkins
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Rita Mendrop
2W–0L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Sandy Horne
1W–0L career · no lines 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.