Teams

Epps Knoxville

2026 Tri-Level 40 & Over-Knoxville · 4.0,3.5,3.0 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.60 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-03-06vs ParksSpurgin/KnoxvilleLost 02
L#1 DoublesTammy Simpson / Emily Elison vs Laura Spurgin / Jennifer Oakley4-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLibby Hicks / Katherine Goodner vs Brook Park / Imke Burfeind3-6, 4-6
2026-02-27vs Gardner/KnoxvilleLost 03
L#1 DoublesLauren Huston / Tammy Simpson vs Lynn Johnson / Roseanne Gardner3-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesAmanda Martin / Jeanne Blake vs Katie Buehler / Julie Harano6-7, 5-7
L#3 DoublesAnna Taylor / Sarah Olesiuk vs Amanda Miles / Heather Wilson2-6, 4-6
2026-02-15vs Ren/KnoxvilleWon 20
W#1 DoublesEmily Elison / Lauren Huston vs Danielle Kwasnik / Jennifer Bell6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesWhitney Callahan / Sarah Olesiuk vs Anita Downes / Helena Liuag6-2, 7-6
2026-02-14vs Walker/KnoxvilleWon 21
W#1 DoublesNicole White / A Marie Kennedy vs Lisa Gangelhoff / Angela Strange6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesAngie Epps / Dawn Coleman vs Kimberly Nelson / Stacey Wright4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesAnna Taylor / Brooke Govert vs Courtney Dyer / Angela Rae Rhody6-0, 6-2
2026-01-17vs BlizzHall40/KnoxvilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesA Marie Kennedy / Nicole White vs Kimberly Woody / Liz Mcclain5-7, 6-7
W#2 DoublesAmanda Martin / Jeanne Blake vs Kimberly Morris / Pearl Jhala6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesAnna Taylor / Katherine Goodner vs Elizabeth Justus / Shannon Thackston5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2026-01-10vs Huffman/KnoxvilleLost 03
L#1 DoublesEmily Elison / Tammy Simpson vs Barbara Miller / Jill Hoschette2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDawn Coleman / Angie Epps vs Jennifer Collins / Angie Goodwyn4-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesLibby Hicks / Sarah Olesiuk vs Rebecca Allen / Heather Varnell1-6, 2-6
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 standings6 teams · 4.0,3.5,3.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1ParksSpurgin/Knoxville5113513144
2BlizzHall40/Knoxville5112616163
3Gardner/Knoxville4212615145
4Epps Knoxville2451327187
5Ren/Knoxville1561225167
6Walker/Knoxville0621632206

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 3.20 estimated across 11 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.

3.81
A Marie Kennedy
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.59
Tammy Simpson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.56
Emily Elison
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.45
Jeanne Blake
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.42
Lauren Huston
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.13
Angie Epps
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.10
Dawn Coleman
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.06
Brooke Govert
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.88
Sarah Olesiuk
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.69
Katherine Goodner
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.49
Libby Hicks
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.

A Marie Kennedy + Tammy Simpson4160% games+6.1% vs expected
Angie Epps + Dawn Coleman3840% games−6.8% vs expected
Emily Elison + Lauren Huston5264% gamesnot 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
A Marie Kennedy
9W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.81
Tammy Simpson
18W–16L career · 3 lines in 2026
25%74%<1%
3.59
4
Emily Elison
136W–77L career · 3 lines in 2026
33%67%<1%
3.56
Jeanne Blake
14W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%65%35%
3.45
Lauren Huston
22W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
3.42
3.5
Angie Epps
9W–16L career · 2 lines in 2026
17%82%<1%
3.13
3.5
Dawn Coleman
5W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
24%76%<1%
3.10
3
Brooke Govert
26W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%34%66%
3.06
Sarah Olesiuk
28W–20L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
2.88
Katherine Goodner
7W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
8%90%1%
2.69
Libby Hicks
4W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
53%47%<1%
2.49

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.