Teams

MG Prueitt

2025 · 2026 Fall USTA 55 & Over Day League - Montgomery

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-12-03Lost 01
L#1 DoublesChris Green / Lisa Melton-Farmer vs Carrie Rhodes / Julie Green4-6, 4-6
2025-10-23Won 10
W#2 DoublesBeth Crowe / Lisa Melton-Farmer vs Tina Ward / Diane Johnson6-2, 6-7, 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 standings2 teams · 2026 Fall USTA 55 & Over Day League - Montgomery
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MG Prueitt4211717146
2Lagoon-Ward-3.5-55-Fall3381023178

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 3.19 estimated across 12 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.

3.38
Cathy Prueitt
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.38
Rose Pendleton
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.37
Kelly DeLaitsch
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #4 Doubles 17% · published
3.31
Angel Garrett
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 22% · published 3.5
3.28
Melissa Snowden
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.20
Pam Crider
usually #4 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.15
Alissa Marodis
published 3.5
3.15
Laura Griffin
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #4 Doubles 43% · published
3.14
Beth Crowe
usually #2 Doubles 63%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.11
Chris Green
usually #4 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.10
Tammy Hayes
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.71
Lisa Melton-Farmer
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Linda Ward
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.

Alissa Marodis + Kelly DeLaitsch5064% games+20.1% vs expected
Laura Griffin + Chris Green7653% games−7.3% vs expected
Laura Griffin + Angel Garrett2348% gamesnot enough data
Cathy Prueitt + Kelly DeLaitsch5067% gamesnot enough data
Alissa Marodis + Tammy Hayes044 matchesnot enough data
Pam Crider + Chris Green224 matchesnot enough data
Rose Pendleton + Chris Green224 matchesnot enough data
Tammy Hayes + Cathy Prueitt303 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.

3.5
Cathy Prueitt
37W–34L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.38
Rose Pendleton
29W–30L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%83%17%
3.38
Kelly DeLaitsch
21W–7L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%84%16%
3.37
3.5
Angel Garrett
30W–21L career · 9 lines in 2026
1%92%7%
3.31
Melissa Snowden
7W–12L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.28
Pam Crider
13W–19L career · 7 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
3.20
3.5
Alissa Marodis
17W–22L career · no lines in 2026
12%88%<1%
3.15
Laura Griffin
18W–11L career · 7 lines in 2026
12%88%<1%
3.15
3.5
Beth Crowe
13W–18L career · 8 lines in 2026
15%85%<1%
3.14
3.5
Chris Green
28W–16L career · 8 lines in 2026
19%80%<1%
3.11
Tammy Hayes
14W–26L career · 8 lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.10
Lisa Melton-Farmer
28W–33L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%6%94%
2.71
Linda Ward
10W–0L career · no lines in 2026
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.