Teams

ParksSpurgin/Knoxville

2026 Combo 40 & Over- Knoxville · 6.5 Women Combo Doubles

11 players · average NTRP 3.20 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-08-29vs Maccagli/KnoxvilleWon 30
W#1 DoublesLea Parks / Carolina Lyngh vs Karen Collins / Linda Bui6-4, 7-6
W#2 DoublesPearl Jhala / Kristen Overbay vs Michelle Uhlenhake / Tara Osborne-Martz5-7, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesBrook Park / Imke Burfeind vs Yoko Umezawa / Heather Varnell7-5, 6-4
2026-08-15vs Hovis/KnoxvilleWon 21
L#1 DoublesCarolina Lyngh / Brook Park vs Rita Thome / Suzanne Carswell3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesKristen Overbay / Laura Warrick vs Leslie Lischer / Lawrie Treakle6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesEmily Mcclenagan / Lea Parks vs Katherine Michalik / Gina Hovis6-3, 6-0
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 6.5 Women Combo Doubles 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 3.07 estimated across 11 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.

3.57
Emily Mcclenagan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.38
Tiffany Barton
published
3.35
Laura Spurgin
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.33
Carolina Lyngh
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.29
Laura Warrick
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.12
Pearl Jhala
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.94
Imke Burfeind
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.81
Lea Parks
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.73
Kristen Overbay
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.64
Brook Park
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.60
Ashley Hoskins
published 3
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.

Pearl Jhala + Laura Spurgin6359% games+9.7% vs expected
Pearl Jhala + Carolina Lyngh5552% games+5.3% vs expected
Laura Spurgin + Emily Mcclenagan4351% games+3.3% vs expected
Laura Spurgin + Carolina Lyngh3346% gamesnot enough data
Laura Spurgin + Tiffany Barton3257% gamesnot enough data
Imke Burfeind + Brook Park4162% gamesnot enough data
Laura Warrick + Carolina Lyngh314 matchesnot enough data
Lea Parks + Carolina Lyngh224 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
Emily Mcclenagan
68W–13L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%28%72%
3.57
Tiffany Barton
41W–15L career · no lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.38
Laura Spurgin
66W–46L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%87%13%
3.35
3.5
Carolina Lyngh
73W–26L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.33
Laura Warrick
55W–50L career · 1 line in 2026
1%94%5%
3.29
Pearl Jhala
63W–36L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%19%81%
3.12
3
Imke Burfeind
35W–11L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%68%32%
2.94
Lea Parks
32W–27L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%92%7%
2.81
Kristen Overbay
27W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%4%96%
2.73
3
Brook Park
29W–23L career · 2 lines in 2026
14%85%<1%
2.64
3
Ashley Hoskins
25W–17L career · no lines in 2026
21%78%<1%
2.60

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.