Teams

Greenhill/Nevelow W4.0S

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

20 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 →
Schedule6 played
2025-11-02Lost 01
L#1 SinglesGianna Cerullo vs Erin Schreyer2-6, 4-6
2025-10-19vs Samuell Grand/Wise W4.0SLost 01
L#1 SinglesGianna Cerullo vs Victoria Coffee3-6, 3-6
2025-10-05vs Canyon Creek/Gooch W4.0SWon 10
W#2 DoublesPatricia Arvanitis / Lani Trieu vs Kathy Leary / Britt Kramer6-3, 6-7, 1-0
2025-09-28Lost 02
L#1 SinglesShelby Johnston vs Michelle Marketos0-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesGianna Cerullo / Kristen Lampe vs Suzanne Flournoy / Alexandra Northington2-6, 0-6
2025-09-21Split 11
W#1 SinglesShelby Johnston vs Katy Bautista6-4, 5-7, 1-0
L#2 DoublesLani Trieu / Brittani Yoo vs Sundee McDonald / Mary Alyce Kaetzel2-6, 4-6
2025-09-07Lost 02
L#1 DoublesLani Trieu / Gina Manning vs Erica Goodman / Heather Vik1-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesShelby Johnston vs Sarah Davis3-6, 0-6
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 standings9 teams · A 18 & Over ADULT Fall W. Sunday
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Greenhill/Schonwald-Newberg W4.0S81261022233
2High Point/Villalobos W.4.0S72261028273
3Samuell Grand/Young W4.0S54211533252
4Greenhill/Nevelow W4.0S54211534297
5TBarM/Scott W4.0S45181844334
6Samuell Grand/Wise W4.0S45132349353
7Rockwall GAC/Lafferty W4.0S36132351358
8Lifetime Plano/Flores-Rolater W4.0S1863061398
9LB Houston/Schneiderman-Chu W4.0S0963063411

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 3.75 estimated across 16 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.

3.92
Gina Manning
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.91
Julie Murray
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published
3.89
Monique Black
usually #1 Doubles 78%, also #2 Doubles 11% · published
3.89
Brittani Yoo
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.88
Tiffany Trinh
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.85
Anne Doise
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.81
Kristen Lampe
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.80
Elizabeth Nevelow
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.77
Patricia Arvanitis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published
3.76
Candice Ewing
usually #1 Doubles 70%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.75
Jenna Kinkead
published
3.74
Lani Trieu
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.68
Maria McGee
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.65
Karen Newby
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.46
Melany White
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.29
Katherine Rader
usually #2 Doubles 56%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published
Gianna Cerullo
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Katie Talman
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Rebecca Neal
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
Shelby Johnston
usually #1 Singles 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.

Julie Murray + Candice Ewing5156% games+6.5% vs expected
Julie Murray + Elizabeth Nevelow14260% games+3.3% vs expected
Monique Black + Candice Ewing8553% games+1.9% vs expected
Monique Black + Elizabeth Nevelow10256% games+0.2% vs expected
Patricia Arvanitis + Elizabeth Nevelow3254% gamesnot enough data
Candice Ewing + Anne Doise3251% gamesnot enough data
Monique Black + Kristen Lampe314 matchesnot enough data
Julie Murray + Kristen Lampe404 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.

Gina Manning
6W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%71%29%
3.92
Julie Murray
26W–7L career · 10 lines in 2026
<1%73%26%
3.91
Monique Black
37W–18L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%78%21%
3.89
4
Brittani Yoo
8W–7L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
3.89
Tiffany Trinh
34W–10L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
3.88
4
Anne Doise
12W–21L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%86%14%
3.85
Kristen Lampe
13W–8L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.81
Elizabeth Nevelow
39W–13L career · 8 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.80
Patricia Arvanitis
19W–17L career · 8 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.77
4
Candice Ewing
28W–17L career · 10 lines in 2026
3%92%4%
3.76
Jenna Kinkead
9W–7L career · no lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.75
Lani Trieu
10W–5L career · 3 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.74
Maria McGee
15W–13L career · 3 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.68
Karen Newby
9W–10L career · 5 lines in 2026
15%84%1%
3.65
Melany White
9W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
62%38%<1%
3.46
Katherine Rader
21W–16L career · 9 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.29
Gianna Cerullo
8W–11L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Katie Talman
6W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
not enough data
Rebecca Neal
9W–7L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Shelby Johnston
4W–4L career · 3 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.