Teams

Cedar Rocketts

2026 Summer Smash Doubles · Womens 3.5

4 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-07-26vs PlaymakersLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaren Isbell / Joy Romano vs Mindy Bolick / Holly Barefoot0-6, 6-2, 0-1
2026-07-22vs CIty HeatLost 01
L#1 DoublesSusan Davis / Michelle Huffman vs Lisa Moore / Rhonda Kiser6-7, 2-6
2026-07-16vs Tate/ BlairLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaren Isbell / Michelle Huffman vs Beth Blair / Wen Tate3-6, 0-6
2026-07-14vs Nippy NutsLost 01
L#1 DoublesSusan Davis / Karen Isbell vs Aleshia Abernathy / Julie Wilson2-6, 3-6
2026-07-09vs RB Smash TrioLost 01
L#1 DoublesSusan Davis / Chapel Davis vs Penny Rylott / Marsha Phillips1-6, 3-6
2026-07-07vs Drop Shot DivasLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaren Isbell / Joy Romano vs Chloee Dula / Lydia Sanders3-6, 3-6
2026-07-01vs Bad BunniesWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Isbell / Joy Romano vs Marianna Geyer / Berkeley Geyer6-1, 6-2
2026-06-12vs String DuetLost 01
L#1 DoublesSusan Davis / Chapel Davis vs Emily Fisher / Oksana Lackey6-4, 3-6, 0-1
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 standings9 teams · Womens 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Nippy Nuts4040018
2CaberNET Smashers4040130
3String Duet4141553
4RB Smash Trio4242547
5Drop Shot Divas2222537
6Tate/ Blair2222537
7Playmakers1212530
8CIty Heat1414852
9Cedar Rocketts17171484

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 2.80 estimated across 4 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.

2.86
Joy Romano
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.81
Karen Isbell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.80
Michelle Huffman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.72
Chapel Davis
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
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.

Karen Isbell + Joy Romano162052% games+6.4% vs expected
Chapel Davis + Karen Isbell5080% gamesnot enough data
Chapel Davis + Joy Romano2352% gamesnot enough data
Michelle Huffman + Karen Isbell123 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
Joy Romano
88W–101L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%83%16%
2.86
3
Karen Isbell
101W–109L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
2.81
Michelle Huffman
20W–26L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
2.80
3
Chapel Davis
87W–97L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
2.72

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.