Teams

Savage/Memphis

2025 Adult 18 & Over Early Start League - Memphis · 3.0 Women

15 players · average NTRP 3.25 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2024-11-14vs Sones/MemphisWon 32
L#1 DoublesEmily Kamm / Molly Beard vs Carol Fields / Robyn Jones2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#1 SinglesMelissa Buchanan vs Grier Stokes6-2, 2-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesFELICIA HAUSER / Amy Lamberson vs Elizabeth Domas / Ginger Collier6-2, 6-3
W#2 SinglesMartha Claybrook vs Teresa Sweeney6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesCarrie Anderson / Rebekah Sudduth vs Caroline Sones / Lauren Carr7-5, 6-1
2024-11-13vs Turner/MemphisWon 32
W#1 DoublesChelsey Savage / Shelley Owens vs Callie Mejia / Lindsey Myers6-2, 6-4
L#1 SinglesMolly Beard vs Lana Holmes6-2, 2-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesFELICIA HAUSER / Sarah Spinosa vs Catherine Lackie / Lexis Zellner6-7, 4-6
W#2 SinglesRebecca Stine vs Janie Beanblossom6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesShanleigh Walton / Rebekah Sudduth vs Natalie Hartman / Maureen Esposito6-3, 6-0
2024-10-31vs Carpenter/MemphisWon 50
W#1 DoublesChelsey Savage / Melissa Buchanan vs Jacqueline Carpenter / Kimberly Hester6-2, 6-3
W#1 SinglesHallie Biggs vs Elizabeth Darby6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesEmily Kamm / Sarah Spinosa vs Micaela Cignetti / Stephanie Bailey6-2, 6-4
W#2 SinglesMartha Claybrook vs Tammy Evangelisti6-4, 7-6
W#3 DoublesCarrie Anderson / Molly Beard vs Katherine Slater / Sherene Katzman6-3, 6-3
2024-10-28vs Ewing/MemphisWon 32
L#1 DoublesJenny Ezzell / Melissa Buchanan vs Heidi Wharton / Taylor Bender0-6, 0-6
W#1 SinglesRebecca Stine vs Debbie Churchey6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesMolly Beard / Sarah Spinosa vs Allison Ewing / Andrea Harano6-7, 2-6
W#2 SinglesJulie Little vs Hollie Marszalek6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesShanleigh Walton / FELICIA HAUSER vs Hallie Bauer / Stefenie Block6-2, 7-6
2024-10-22vs James/MemphisSplit 22
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Day / Chelsey Savage vs Christi Adams / Christine Loftin6-2, 6-2
L#1 SinglesRebecca Stine vs Madelaine Cable0-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesShanleigh Walton / Jenny Ezzell vs Lisa James / Lisa McIntosh7-5, 6-2
L#3 DoublesAmy Lamberson / Martha Claybrook vs Carie Costello / Staci Gill7-5, 3-6, 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 3.0 Women 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 2.88 estimated across 14 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.

3.20
Chelsey Savage
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.13
Rebecca Stine
usually #2 Singles 33%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.06
Jenny Ezzell
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.06
Shanleigh Walton
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.01
Julie Little
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
2.95
Hallie Biggs
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.92
Melissa Buchanan
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
2.87
Shelley Owens
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
2.83
Sarah Spinosa
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.81
Molly Beard
usually #1 Doubles 25%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
2.79
Emily Kamm
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Amy Lamberson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.61
Martha Claybrook
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.55
Rebekah Sudduth
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.53
FELICIA HAUSER
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Shelley Owens + Rebecca Stine6161% games+12.4% vs expected
Jenny Ezzell + Sarah Spinosa224 matchesnot enough data
Rebecca Stine + Chelsey Savage314 matchesnot enough data
Jenny Ezzell + Shanleigh Walton213 matchesnot enough data
Shelley Owens + Chelsey Savage213 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
Chelsey Savage
20W–15L career · 6 lines in 2025
8%91%2%
3.20
Rebecca Stine
14W–8L career · 6 lines in 2025
18%82%<1%
3.13
Jenny Ezzell
21W–12L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%33%67%
3.06
Shanleigh Walton
22W–8L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%34%66%
3.06
Julie Little
20W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
0%<1%>99%
3.01
Hallie Biggs
7W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
65%35%<1%
2.95
Melissa Buchanan
5W–8L career · 6 lines in 2025
72%28%<1%
2.92
Shelley Owens
12W–6L career · 5 lines in 2025
83%17%<1%
2.87
Sarah Spinosa
6W–5L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
2.83
Molly Beard
16W–12L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
2.81
Emily Kamm
5W–2L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
2.79
3
Amy Lamberson
1W–3L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Martha Claybrook
7W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
2.61
Rebekah Sudduth
8W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
36%64%<1%
2.55
FELICIA HAUSER
3W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
41%59%<1%
2.53

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.