Teams

SRYC -DiSanti

2026 Adult 18 & Over - GC · Women 3.0

14 players · average NTRP 3.00 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-04-21vs Craddock - BiloxiWon 31
W#1 DoublesMadison Ward / Mandy Flurry vs Erin Biancamano / Kelly Robinson6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesCharlotte Gattis / Cheryl Bullock vs Courtney Hall / Jennifer Mitchell6-3, 6-0
L#2 SinglesStephenie Baker vs Sarah Craddock2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesTracy Jackson-Wilson / Lauren Purvis vs Michelle Stogner / Taylor Johnson7-5, 6-2
2026-03-17vs BBTC - Brehm 18'sLost 13
W#1 DoublesMandy Flurry / Madison Ward vs Shirley Brehm / Jami Lloyd3-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesPatti Christensen / Tracy Jackson-Wilson vs Pam Berdine / Michele Gargiulo6-4, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesKaty Boyer vs Joni Creel3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesTracey Mathews / Stephenie Baker vs Dana Delvescovo / Lynn Hebert4-6, 1-6
2026-03-10vs BBTC - DenmarkLost 13
W#1 DoublesAdelaide Moore / Mandy Flurry vs Kathleen Mayer / Jolene McMorran7-6, 6-1
L#1 SinglesKaty Boyer vs Wendy Ray4-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesPatti Christensen / Charlotte Gattis vs Jaime Denmark / Kathi Nelms5-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesTracy Jackson-Wilson / Nancy Greene vs Marymargaret Kuhlmann / Melissa Steenkamp6-7, 2-6
2026-03-04vs Halstead - BrumleySplit 22
W#1 DoublesAdelaide Moore / Mandy Flurry vs Kim Lyons / Toni Fillmore5-7, 6-1, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCharlotte Gattis / Mary Lang vs Mary Brumley / Teresa Parrish3-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 SinglesKaty Boyer vs Schyler St Amant6-2, 6-4
L#3 DoublesTracy Jackson-Wilson / Madison Ward vs Cynthia Baggett / Carlie Saylor3-6, 1-6
2026-02-19vs BBTC-MATTHEWS 3.0 WWon 32
L#1 DoublesPatti Christensen / Cheryl Bullock vs Robin Mitterer / Allyson Winter4-6, 0-6
W#1 SinglesKaty Boyer vs Tyler Ash6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesAdelaide Moore / Lauren Purvis vs Stacey Rishel / Lauren Ray7-5, 6-3
L#2 SinglesTracey Mathews vs Elan Buckley0-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesStephenie Baker / Stephanie Chapman vs Brianna Beesley / Maggie Hester1-6, 6-4, 1-0
2026-02-12vs Mitchell TOCCWon 30
W#1 DoublesCharlotte Gattis / Mandy Flurry vs Tara Mitchell / Nicole Huffman6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMadison Ward / Lauren Purvis vs Siera Roy / Holly French6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesStephenie Baker / Nancy Greene vs Lindsey OConnell / Michelle Smith6-2, 6-3
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 3.0 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 2.50 estimated across 12 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.

2.79
Mandy Flurry
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.76
Charlotte Gattis
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.71
Madison Ward
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.67
Cheryl Bullock
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.63
Lauren Purvis
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
2.59
Patti Christensen
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.52
Adelaide Moore
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.42
Katy Boyer
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
2.42
Stephenie Baker
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
2.34
Tracy Jackson-Wilson
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.25
Mary Lang
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
1.83
Tracey Mathews
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Mary Anne DiSanti
published
Nancy Greene
usually #3 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.

Tracy Jackson-Wilson + Madison Ward5154% games+13.2% vs expected
Mandy Flurry + Charlotte Gattis3646% games+5.4% vs expected
Mandy Flurry + Adelaide Moore3546% games+1.8% vs expected
Stephenie Baker + Tracey Mathews2342% gamesnot enough data
Patti Christensen + Charlotte Gattis213 matchesnot enough data
Patti Christensen + Cheryl Bullock033 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.

Mandy Flurry
26W–20L career · 8 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.79
3
Charlotte Gattis
13W–18L career · 4 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
2.76
Madison Ward
24W–12L career · 4 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
2.71
3
Cheryl Bullock
6W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
2.67
Lauren Purvis
16W–14L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%18%82%
2.63
Patti Christensen
9W–21L career · 3 lines in 2026
26%74%<1%
2.59
3
Adelaide Moore
5W–5L career · 3 lines in 2026
43%57%<1%
2.52
Katy Boyer
26W–23L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%71%29%
2.42
Stephenie Baker
29W–40L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%72%28%
2.42
Tracy Jackson-Wilson
19W–16L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%87%13%
2.34
Mary Lang
2W–17L career · 1 line in 2026
96%4%<1%
2.25
Tracey Mathews
9W–31L career · 8 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.83
Mary Anne DiSanti
0W–2L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Nancy Greene
1W–1L 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.