Teams

Glickman/Nashville

2025 Combo 18 & Over - Nashville · 7.5 Women - FRI AM & MON PM

17 players · average NTRP 3.94 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule
Flight standings8 teams · 7.5 Women - FRI AM & MON PM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1McNabb/Hamlin/Nashville7018311144
2Glickman/Nashville7017412147
3Hermann/Nashville5213818164
4Davis/Neal/Nashville5213818163
5Brooks/Falk/Nashville43111025214
6Grimm/Zwerner/Nashville3491227209
7Spalding/Nashville2561531225
8Marcum/Nashville1651633226

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 3.56 estimated across 17 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.

4.00
Erin Akery
published 4
3.83
Alma Islas
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.83
Kristen Conoley
published
3.76
Regan Baltasar
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.73
Diana Buss
published 4
3.69
Heidi Nickel
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.65
Brenda Eckhart
published 4
3.61
Heather Wire
published 4
3.59
Heather Brandon
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.53
Michelle Salada
published
3.52
Sally Major
published
3.46
Shari Glickman
published
3.46
Traci Holton
published
3.44
Jennifer Knight
published
3.21
Perry Baltasar
published
3.08
Mariam Haider
published
3.04
April Penny
published 3.5
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.

Shari Glickman + Traci Holton11561% games+12.8% vs expected
Jennifer Knight + Brenda Eckhart24861% games+9.3% vs expected
Kristen Conoley + Heather Brandon2352% games+0.4% vs expected
Heather Wire + Heidi Nickel7852% games−2.1% vs expected
Diana Buss + Shari Glickman224 matchesnot enough data
Michelle Salada + Perry Baltasar213 matchesnot enough data
Kristen Conoley + Regan Baltasar123 matchesnot enough data
Shari Glickman + Heather Brandon213 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.

4
Erin Akery
24W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%49%51%
4.00
4
Alma Islas
27W–7L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.83
Kristen Conoley
4W–7L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%10%
3.83
Regan Baltasar
10W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
3.76
4
Diana Buss
6W–8L career · no lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Heidi Nickel
88W–80L career · 3 lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Brenda Eckhart
33W–10L career · no lines in 2025
12%87%<1%
3.65
4
Heather Wire
12W–13L career · no lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.61
4
Heather Brandon
42W–22L career · 5 lines in 2025
25%75%<1%
3.59
Michelle Salada
16W–49L career · no lines in 2025
40%60%<1%
3.53
Sally Major
8W–11L career · no lines in 2025
43%57%<1%
3.52
Shari Glickman
65W–49L career · no lines in 2025
<1%61%39%
3.46
Traci Holton
23W–17L career · no lines in 2025
<1%64%36%
3.46
Jennifer Knight
35W–11L career · no lines in 2025
<1%69%31%
3.44
Perry Baltasar
6W–21L career · no lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.21
Mariam Haider
4W–7L career · no lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.08
3.5
April Penny
4W–25L career · no lines in 2025
39%61%<1%
3.04

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.