Teams

Dahlgren/Memphis

2026 Adult 18 & Over -Memphis · 2.5 Women 18 & over

4 players · average NTRP / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-04-29vs Magness/MemphisSplit 11
L#1 DoublesKelly Richardson Dahlgren / Marla Ghosheh vs Brooke Davis / Julia Magness6-4, 0-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesToni Carmichael / Lisa Warren vs Anne Azmi / Sonja Dickey6-3, 6-4
2026-04-22vs McLaughlin/MemphisLost 02
L#1 DoublesJeressia Williamson / Brandy Self vs Candace Askew / Doriann Fairchild4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesToni Carmichael / Lisa Warren vs Liza Easley / Lauren Price6-2, 6-7, 0-1
2026-04-15vs Greer/MemphisWon 10
W#2 DoublesToni Carmichael / Lisa Warren vs Erin Mullis / Kerstin Wright4-6, 7-5, 1-0
2026-04-01vs Conrad/MemphisSplit 11
L#1 SinglesJeressia Williamson vs Mary Anne Pohlman1-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesKelly Richardson Dahlgren / Lisa Warren vs Mary Claire Phillips / Chantall Jenkins6-0, 6-1
2026-03-31vs Ferrara/MemphisWon 10
W#2 DoublesKelly Richardson Dahlgren / Jeressia Williamson vs Shaila Anderson / Amanda Raines6-0, 4-6, 1-0
2026-03-25vs Jussely/MemphisLost 02
L#1 DoublesKeneisha Fountain / Jeressia Williamson vs Kristi Crawford / Martha Carter2-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesKelly Richardson Dahlgren / Kim Nichols vs Julie Aquino / Allison Gilbert4-6, 4-6
2026-03-18vs Powers/MemphisSplit 11
L#1 DoublesKeneisha Fountain / Jeressia Williamson vs Anna Smith / Ashley Powers4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesKelly Richardson Dahlgren / Marla Ghosheh vs Summer Farmer / Sarah Gallagher6-4, 6-4
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 standings7 teams · 2.5 Women 18 & over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Taylor/Memphis64171329227
2Biedenharn/Memphis64141635290
3Dahlgren/Memphis5212922178
4JLewis/Memphis55161431249
5Powers/Memphis4312922183
6Nelson/Memphis1982246311
7Ferrara/Memphis0751635219

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 2.10 estimated across 4 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.

2.17
Kelly Richardson Dahlgren
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published
2.11
Jeressia Williamson
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
2.08
Keneisha Fountain
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.05
Toni Carmichael
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · 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.

Toni Carmichael + Kelly Richardson Dahlgren033 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.

Kelly Richardson Dahlgren
7W–21L career · 10 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.17
Jeressia Williamson
3W–8L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.11
Keneisha Fountain
9W–15L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.08
Toni Carmichael
9W–23L career · 7 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.05

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.