Teams

Burnstein/Nashville

2025 Tri-Level 40 & Over - Nashville · 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Women - Wednesday AM

16 players · average NTRP 3.67 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-07-16vs Comegna/NashvilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesJulie Burnstein / Ashley Stringfellow vs Melinda Stone / Allyson Edwards5-7, 3-6
W#2 DoublesWhitney Conyers / Misty Holladay vs Nicki Robins / Mary Powers6-2, 6-1
L#3 DoublesNancy Ricciardelli / Joy Cox vs Carolyn Slandzicki / Nicole Keenan3-6, 3-6
2025-07-09vs Broome/NashvilleWon 21
W#1 DoublesBriana Mullenax / Whitney Conyers vs Kristi Broome / Sunyoung Fitt6-0, 6-4
W#2 DoublesMisty Holladay / Mary Margaret Behncke vs Cammy Arney / Jessica Lester6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesBrittany Hammrich / Katie Dowdell vs Leah Wilson / Sarah Fowler3-6, 4-6
2025-07-02vs Schneider/Vestevich/NashvilleSplit 11
L#1 DoublesJulie Burnstein / Misty Holladay vs Mary Grimm / Hope Cummiskey4-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesMitsuyo Suzuki / Katie Dowdell vs Angelique Hopper / Ryan Sedlacek7-5, 1-6, 1-0
2025-06-25vs Babu/NashvilleWon 21
L#1 DoublesTammy Fessler / Stephanie Baas vs Jessica Warren / Christy Hermann6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesPoonam Kabaria / Lucy Duvall vs Cristin Hambidge / Katie Ouellette3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMitsuyo Suzuki / Katie Dowdell vs Nicole Hogue / Kelly Stanley6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2025-06-11vs Palk/NashvilleWon 30
W#1 DoublesJulie Burnstein / Ashley Stringfellow vs Tanya Capeling / Allison Wright6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesWhitney Conyers / Poonam Kabaria vs Sue Anne Perry / Anne Disney4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesRebecca Kelton / Joy Cox vs Courtney Conklin / Mary Beth Riley3-6, 6-2, 1-0
2025-06-04vs Buhalis/NashvilleWon 21
W#1 DoublesTammy Fessler / Stephanie Baas vs Kelly Cole / Debora Edkin7-5, 6-1
L#2 DoublesPoonam Kabaria / Lucy Duvall vs Maria Schoonover / Ginger Childs4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesBrittany Hammrich / Katie Dowdell vs Kim Thompson / Kristin Price4-6, 6-1, 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 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Women - Wednesday 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 3.25 estimated across 15 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.

3.76
Briana Mullenax
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.64
Tammy Fessler
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.57
Whitney Conyers
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.57
Julie Burnstein
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.55
Misty Holladay
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.52
Ashley Stringfellow
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.45
Stephanie Baas
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.43
Poonam Kabaria
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.24
Mary Margaret Behncke
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.15
Lucy Duvall
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.04
Joy Cox
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.83
Mitsuyo Suzuki
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.75
Katie Dowdell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.68
Nancy Ricciardelli
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.57
Brittany Hammrich
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Rebecca Kelton
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.

Misty Holladay + Whitney Conyers3258% games+12.0% vs expected
Briana Mullenax + Whitney Conyers19363% games+9.6% vs expected
Tammy Fessler + Ashley Stringfellow5259% games+7.7% vs expected
Julie Burnstein + Whitney Conyers8555% games+6.1% vs expected
Katie Dowdell + Brittany Hammrich4843% games−2.4% vs expected
Julie Burnstein + Briana Mullenax3453% games−3.2% vs expected
Ashley Stringfellow + Julie Burnstein3347% games−4.3% vs expected
Tammy Fessler + Stephanie Baas2442% games−5.2% vs expected
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
Briana Mullenax
40W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
2%95%3%
3.76
Tammy Fessler
21W–19L career · 2 lines in 2025
14%86%<1%
3.64
Whitney Conyers
44W–22L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%28%72%
3.57
Julie Burnstein
47W–29L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%30%70%
3.57
Misty Holladay
32W–19L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%35%65%
3.55
4
Ashley Stringfellow
20W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
43%57%<1%
3.52
Stephanie Baas
18W–19L career · 3 lines in 2025
66%34%<1%
3.45
Poonam Kabaria
34W–20L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
3.43
Mary Margaret Behncke
18W–15L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%95%2%
3.24
Lucy Duvall
9W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
12%88%<1%
3.15
Joy Cox
38W–15L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%37%63%
3.04
Mitsuyo Suzuki
12W–8L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%90%10%
2.83
Katie Dowdell
17W–22L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%95%3%
2.75
Nancy Ricciardelli
9W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
9%91%1%
2.68
3
Brittany Hammrich
12W–20L career · 2 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
2.57
Rebecca Kelton
5W–2L 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.