Teams

Stemmler/Nashville

2025 Tri-Level 18 & Over - Nashville · 3.5, 3.0. 2.5 Women Thursday AM

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-07-22vs Thomas/Blevins/NashvilleLost 03
L#1 DoublesCourtney Beall / Christina Beattie vs Melissa Goldberg / Clair Bartholomew1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJennifer Gilkey / Sara Lindsay vs Stephanie Protz / Kelly Kirby-Piovarcy3-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesWhitney Kemp / Reena Patel vs Emily Richardson / Allison Varble1-6, 2-6
2025-06-05vs Angus/NashvilleLost 03
L#1 DoublesChristina Beattie / Courtney Beall vs Erin Neal / Elizabeth Davis3-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesSara Lindsay / Jennifer Gilkey vs Nikki Turitto / Joy Cox7-6, 5-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMeg Stemmler / Patricia Knight vs Hayley Robinson / Catherine Warfield0-6, 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 standings for 3.5, 3.0. 2.5 Women Thursday 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 2.85 estimated across 9 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.

3.48
Lauren Pauley
published
Courtney Beall
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.11
Christina Beattie
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.04
Chiarra Jessey
published 3.5
3.00
Jennifer Gilkey
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.93
Sara Lindsay
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.86
Madison Fair
published
2.70
Rachel Walker
published
2.41
Meg Stemmler
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.12
Whitney Kemp
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Joanna Paszek
published
Reena Patel
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.

Jennifer Gilkey + Sara Lindsay224 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.

Lauren Pauley
4W–1L career · no lines in 2025
<1%56%44%
3.48
3.5
Courtney Beall
2W–3L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Christina Beattie
14W–17L career · 5 lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
3.11
3.5
Chiarra Jessey
7W–6L career · no lines in 2025
40%60%<1%
3.04
Jennifer Gilkey
9W–8L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%50%50%
3.00
Sara Lindsay
9W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
2.93
Madison Fair
15W–9L career · no lines in 2025
1%84%16%
2.86
Rachel Walker
16W–19L career · no lines in 2025
8%91%2%
2.70
Meg Stemmler
18W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
0%74%26%
2.41
Whitney Kemp
7W–16L career · 1 line in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.12
Joanna Paszek
0W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Reena Patel
2W–6L career · 1 line 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.