Nall 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM
2026 Piedmont Combo 40 & Over · 6.5 40 & Over Women
9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTH CAROLINA
Schedule5 played
i
Flight standings21 teams · 6.5 40 & Over Women
| Team | W | L | Sets lost | Games lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1Berreth/Herron 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 2 | 0 | 2 | 22 |
| 2Davis 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 2 | 0 | 3 | 39 |
| 3Bunch/York 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs AM | 2 | 0 | 4 | 41 |
| 4Clancy 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs AM | 2 | 0 | 4 | 44 |
| 5Vartanian/Mohorn 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 1 | 0 | 1 | 17 |
| 6Taylordean 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs AM | 1 | 0 | 2 | 24 |
| 7McPherson/Allred 40s 6.5 Combo | 1 | 0 | 2 | 26 |
| 8Linden/LJ 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 1 | 0 | 4 | 36 |
| 9Pressley 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 1 | 1 | 5 | 50 |
| 10Michaels 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs AM | 1 | 1 | 8 | 47 |
| 11Pitts 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 12Pretzsch 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs Pm | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 13Nall 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 0 | 1 | 4 | 34 |
| 14Crawford/Tao 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 0 | 1 | 4 | 28 |
| 15Olalere 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 0 | 1 | 5 | 33 |
| 16Baker 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs AM | 0 | 1 | 5 | 38 |
| 17Busch 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 0 | 1 | 6 | 36 |
| 18Propst / Nadel 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 0 | 1 | 6 | 38 |
| 19Terrell/Billings 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs AM | 0 | 2 | 9 | 64 |
| 20Kuebert/Causey 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs AM | 0 | 2 | 10 | 66 |
| 21Rhyne/Dunn 40s 6.5W Combo Thurs PM | 0 | 2 | 12 | 72 |
Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.
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 2.79 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.
Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.
| Sharlotte Brooks + Amber Siesling | 4–2 | 56% games | +15.4% vs expected |
| Jennifer Nall + Tina Dixon | 0–5 | 31% games | −2.9% vs expected |
| Bridget Cornwall + Amber Siesling | 4–2 | 48% games | −6.9% vs expected |
| Sharlotte Brooks + Bridget Cornwall | 3–2 | 52% games | not enough data |
| Bridget Cornwall + Jennifer Nall | 2–2 | 4 matches | not enough data |
| Amber Siesling + Tina Dixon | 1–3 | 4 matches | not enough data |
| Sharlotte Brooks + Tina Dixon | 2–1 | 3 matches | not enough data |
| Bridget Cornwall + Tina Dixon | 1–2 | 3 matches | not enough data |
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.
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.