Teams

Angus/Cox/Nashville

2025 Adult 18 & Over - Nashville · 3.0 Women - Monday AM

17 players · average NTRP 3.00 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2025-03-17vs Madson/NashvilleWon 50
W#1 DoublesCarey Burch / Kate Elasy vs Kelly Carter / Lauren O'Brien6-4, 6-2
W#1 SinglesLauren Pollard vs Samantha Reilly6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesJill Talbert / Sarah Angus vs Melanie Rogers / Carolina Vilomar6-2, 6-1
W#2 SinglesKatye Hughes vs Bianca Soma7-5, 7-6
W#3 DoublesJoy Cox / Lauren Carlson vs Dianne Garland / Diana Short6-1, 7-5
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 3.0 Women - Monday 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 2.86 estimated across 16 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.

3.42
Lauren Pollard
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
3.18
Kelli Haywood
published
3.07
Elizabeth Coburn
published
3.06
Nikki Turitto
published
2.98
Joy Cox
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.98
Graham Bratton
published
2.86
Amy Frankel Nau
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.85
Katye Hughes
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
2.84
Jill Talbert
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.81
Lauren Carlson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.77
Jill Obremskey
published
2.73
Nancy Ricciardelli
published
2.69
Kate Elasy
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.61
Lele Thompson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.51
2.50
Carey Burch
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
Bridget Levy
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.

Joy Cox + Lauren Pollard4166% games+11.3% vs expected
Kate Elasy + Amy Frankel Nau123 matchesnot enough data
Katye Hughes + Jill Talbert303 matchesnot enough data
Joy Cox + Kelli Haywood213 matchesnot enough data
Kelli Haywood + Elizabeth Coburn303 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 Pollard
32W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%<1%>99%
3.42
Kelli Haywood
20W–5L career · no lines in 2025
<1%10%90%
3.18
Elizabeth Coburn
14W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%30%70%
3.07
Nikki Turitto
21W–10L career · no lines in 2025
<1%34%66%
3.06
Joy Cox
25W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%56%44%
2.98
Graham Bratton
5W–1L career · no lines in 2025
<1%57%43%
2.98
3
Amy Frankel Nau
17W–21L career · 1 line in 2025
1%84%16%
2.86
Katye Hughes
11W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
1%86%14%
2.85
Jill Talbert
12W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
1%87%12%
2.84
Lauren Carlson
11W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
1%90%8%
2.81
Jill Obremskey
5W–9L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
Nancy Ricciardelli
7W–6L career · no lines in 2025
5%92%3%
2.73
Kate Elasy
9W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
9%89%1%
2.69
Lele Thompson
10W–19L career · 2 lines in 2025
21%79%<1%
2.61
3
Catherine Warfield
4W–6L career · no lines in 2025
47%53%<1%
2.51
3
Carey Burch
4W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
51%49%<1%
2.50
Bridget Levy
0W–1L career · no 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.