Teams

MTC - Paquin/Clay

2025 Adult 18 & Over Women Winter Night - Mobile · 2.5 Women Winter Night 18+

11 players · average NTRP 2.67 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-02-05vs MO - Nicholson 2.5Split 11
W#1 DoublesMadi Bruce / Amy Clay vs Nikki Nicholson / Leana Ott7-6, 7-6
L#2 DoublesSummer Jacobs / Mary Alyce Davis vs Melanie Leege / Elizabeth Boone0-6, 0-6
2025-01-15vs CCM - Roberds/SandWon 21
W#1 DoublesSummer Pitts / Rachel Hazen vs Terrell Ewing / Anne Sand6-1, 6-4
W#1 SinglesLacey Paquin vs Elsa McVea6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesMadi Bruce / Amy Clay vs Caroline McGugin / Leigh Crowley0-6, 1-6
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 2.5 Women Winter Night 18+ 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 2.20 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.

2.74
Amber Martenstein
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
2.42
Stephenie Baker
published
2.40
Donna Anderson
published
2.30
Summer Pitts
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.25
Lacey Paquin
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.15
Betsy McDermott
published 2.5
2.01
Amy Clay
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
1.87
Summer Jacobs
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
1.63
Mary Alyce Davis
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Madi Bruce
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Rachel Hazen
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · 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.

Amber Martenstein + Stephenie Baker4551% games+5.8% vs expected
Lacey Paquin + Stephenie Baker61047% games+2.8% 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.

3
Amber Martenstein
32W–36L career · 4 lines in 2025
4%93%3%
2.74
Stephenie Baker
29W–40L career · no lines in 2025
0%72%28%
2.42
Donna Anderson
2W–3L career · no lines in 2025
0%76%24%
2.40
Summer Pitts
16W–22L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%92%8%
2.30
Lacey Paquin
11W–25L career · 1 line in 2025
0%96%4%
2.25
2.5
Betsy McDermott
6W–9L career · no lines in 2025
0%99%1%
2.15
2.5
Amy Clay
1W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.01
Summer Jacobs
2W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
0%>99%<1%
1.87
Mary Alyce Davis
1W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
0%>99%<1%
1.63
Madi Bruce
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Rachel Hazen
7W–3L career · 2 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.