Teams

"Shay"nanigans

2025 B · CS Adult 18 & Over League

10 players · average NTRP 3.33 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-07-31Lost 01
L#2 DoublesCandy Lischka / Ashley Doss vs Sherry Bonds / Chelsie Breaux0-6, 2-6
2025-07-24vs Donna's TeamLost 01
L#3 DoublesAshley Doss / Heather Novicke vs Natalie Kidd / Cherry Jackson6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2025-06-12Won 10
W#2 DoublesJennifer Parks / Ashley Doss vs Stacey Stuhrenberg / Natalie Kidd6-1, 6-2
2025-06-05vs Donna's TeamWon 10
W#2 DoublesKerri Cawley / Ashley Doss vs Donna Miller / Cherry Jackson2-6, 6-4, 1-0
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 CS Adult 18 & Over League 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 3.13 estimated across 1 rated player. 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.

Ashley Doss
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.13
Dana Pendleton
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Candy Lischka
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3
Heather Novicke
usually #3 Doubles 55%, also #2 Doubles 36% · published
Kerri Cawley
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Kristina Walters
usually #1 Doubles 41%, also #2 Doubles 35% · published
Maegan Jackson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Patricia Davis
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Roxie Johnson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Shay Simpson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · 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.

Shay Simpson + Roxie Johnson5073% gamesnot enough data
Shay Simpson + Dana Pendleton123 matchesnot enough data
Patricia Davis + Kerri Cawley213 matchesnot enough data
Heather Novicke + Candy Lischka123 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.

3.5
Ashley Doss
2W–2L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Dana Pendleton
9W–8L career · 7 lines in 2025
17%83%<1%
3.13
3
Candy Lischka
3W–7L career · 10 lines in 2025
not enough data
Heather Novicke
5W–6L career · 11 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kerri Cawley
7W–2L career · 9 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kristina Walters
7W–12L career · 17 lines in 2025
not enough data
Maegan Jackson
4W–2L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Patricia Davis
11W–8L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Roxie Johnson
11W–12L career · 6 lines in 2025
not enough data
Shay Simpson
13W–11L career · 8 lines in 2025
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.