Teams

Reynolds

2026 Combo Doubles 18&Over-NE · Women 5.5

9 players · average NTRP 2.67 / 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 →
Schedule2 played
2026-08-30vs 5.5 BeckWon 21
L#1 DoublesEmma Geiger / Alicia Milstead vs Miranda Conn / Kristen Turner Tucker6-7, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesApril Gray / Jenna Trautman vs Loren Duke / Samantha Weatherford4-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKayla Reynolds / Corrie Weatherford vs Tedi Kennedy / Ashley Gilliland6-1, 7-5
2026-08-24vs Corinth/FulghumWon 21
W#1 DoublesCorrie Weatherford / Kayla Reynolds vs Katy Stanley / Ashley Majors6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesRiley Pearcs / Kristi Martin vs Jennifer Fulghum / Doris Maness6-1, 6-0
L#3 DoublesSherry Vance / Carleigh Melton vs Margaret Orr / Taylor Moak3-6, 7-5, 0-1
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 standings4 teams · Women 5.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
15.5 Beck2042445
2Corinth/Fulghum12451295
3Reynolds000000
4Z Park Combo0112430

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 2.41 estimated across 9 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.

2.66
Kayla Reynolds
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.58
Alicia Milstead
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.55
Sherry Vance
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.50
Morgan Lyons
published
2.40
Susie Miley
published
2.34
Emma Geiger
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.31
Riley Pearcs
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.25
Corrie Weatherford
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.11
Jenna Trautman
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.

Kayla Reynolds + Susie Miley6262% games+23.7% vs expected
Corrie Weatherford + Kayla Reynolds4258% gamesnot enough data
Sherry Vance + Susie Miley033 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.

Kayla Reynolds
46W–33L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%11%89%
2.66
3
Alicia Milstead
34W–38L career · 2 lines in 2026
26%74%<1%
2.58
Sherry Vance
9W–43L career · 1 line in 2026
36%64%<1%
2.55
Morgan Lyons
5W–11L career · no lines in 2026
0%49%51%
2.50
Susie Miley
29W–40L career · no lines in 2026
78%22%<1%
2.40
2.5
Emma Geiger
8W–6L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
0%89%11%
2.34
Riley Pearcs
3W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%92%8%
2.31
2.5
Corrie Weatherford
12W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%97%3%
2.25
Jenna Trautman
8W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.11

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.