Teams

Simpson/McNabb/Nashville

2025 Adult 18 & Over - Early Start League-Nashville · 3.5 Women - FRI AM

14 players · average NTRP 3.88 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2024-09-27vs Vogel/Wood/NashvilleWon 31
L#1 DoublesSuzy Simpson / Stephanie Webb vs Sarah Vogel / Morgan Hinkley4-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesAshley Stringfellow / Lori Tharp vs Paige Adair / Paige Patton6-2, 7-5
W#2 SinglesJessica Boyd vs Julie Wilson6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesJulie Lavigne / Mary Freeman vs Victoria Lubnik / Casey Parker6-3, 6-1
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 3.5 Women - FRI AM 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 3.44 estimated across 13 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.

3.85
Alexandra Peyton
published 4
3.72
Carly Mariani
published 4
3.71
Terri Bolden Ward
published
3.51
Lori Tharp
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.48
Ashley Stringfellow
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.41
Jennifer Meeks
published
3.38
Thalia Kahl
published
3.35
Suzy Simpson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.33
Jennifer McNabb
published
3.28
Julie Lavigne
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.27
Julie Dearman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
3.26
Elinor Adams
published
3.22
Caroline Bryan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Jessica Boyd
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 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.

Suzy Simpson + Jennifer Meeks404 matchesnot enough data
Caroline Bryan + Julie Dearman213 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
Alexandra Peyton
10W–4L career · no lines in 2025
1%86%14%
3.85
4
Carly Mariani
17W–1L career · no lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.72
Terri Bolden Ward
7W–2L career · no lines in 2025
<1%7%93%
3.71
Lori Tharp
5W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
47%53%<1%
3.51
4
Ashley Stringfellow
15W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
54%46%<1%
3.48
Jennifer Meeks
16W–6L career · no lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
3.41
Thalia Kahl
22W–20L career · no lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.38
Suzy Simpson
29W–16L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%85%14%
3.35
Jennifer McNabb
19W–8L career · no lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.33
Julie Lavigne
7W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
94%6%<1%
3.28
Julie Dearman
23W–23L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%92%5%
3.27
Elinor Adams
8W–4L career · no lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.26
3.5
Caroline Bryan
17W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
Jessica Boyd
7W–1L career · 3 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.