Teams

Hinkle/META

2026 Combo 18 & over-META · 6.5 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule3 upcoming · 3 played
Sep 12 11:00 AM
Liberty Bell Tennis Center
Sep 19 11:00 AM
Liberty Bell Tennis Center
Sep 26 11:00 AM
Liberty Bell Tennis Center
2026-09-02vs Janiszewski-Betancourt/METAWon 21
W#1 DoublesHolli Cox / Julia Vargo vs Raegan Goodson / Kirsten Hoskins7-6, 6-1
L#2 DoublesSarah LaGuardia / Jessica Taylor vs Christina Betancourt / Olivia Osborne3-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesMary Beth Shults-kumar / Lynne Little vs Kari Holt / Ju Mo6-1, 6-0
2026-08-26vs Janiszewski-Betancourt/METAWon 30
W#1 DoublesAnita Jilton / Mary Beth Shults-kumar vs Madga Cox / Olivia Osborne6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLynne Little / Shannon Hinkle vs Morgan Scott / Christina Betancourt6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesSarah LaGuardia / Makie Kordamiri vs Jane Dean / Kirsten Hoskins6-3, 6-2
2026-08-19vs Janiszewski-Betancourt/METAWon 21
L#1 DoublesEve Little Bradford / Lydia Ferguson-Hoskins vs Madga Cox / Olivia Osborne6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesHolli Cox / Jessica Taylor vs Raegan Goodson / Regan Jordan7-5, 6-1
W#3 DoublesSarah LaGuardia / Julia Vargo vs Kari Holt / Morgan Scott6-4, 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 standings2 teams · 6.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Hinkle/META1021221
2Janiszewski-Betancourt/META0112535

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 3.23 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.

3.56
Mary Beth Shults-kumar
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.51
Holli Cox
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.25
Julia Vargo
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.23
Shannon Hinkle
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.19
Eve Little Bradford
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.17
Sarah LaGuardia
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.16
Lynne Little
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.10
Anita Jilton
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.92
Makie Kordamiri
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.

Lynne Little + Eve Little Bradford9170% games+14.1% vs expected
Shannon Hinkle + Sarah LaGuardia0532% games−13.9% vs expected
Lynne Little + Sarah LaGuardia224 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.

Mary Beth Shults-kumar
10W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%35%65%
3.56
Holli Cox
10W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%47%53%
3.51
Julia Vargo
7W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.25
Shannon Hinkle
14W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
5%92%3%
3.23
Eve Little Bradford
25W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%9%91%
3.19
Sarah LaGuardia
13W–19L career · 3 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.17
Lynne Little
31W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%13%87%
3.16
3
Anita Jilton
33W–16L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%24%76%
3.10
Makie Kordamiri
11W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%72%28%
2.92

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.