Teams

CMurphy (Carmel)

2025 Adult 40 & Over League · 40 & Over Adult 3.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 2.83 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
L#1 DoublesLindsay Schall / Emily Baker vs Annie Spanjers / Lindsay Thompson6-7, 0-6
2025-04-11vs AShea (Carmel)Won 10
W#3 DoublesLaura Satterly / Lindsay Schall vs Casey Fuller / Terri Beans6-1, 6-4
2025-04-09vs BTobia (Brookhaven)Lost 01
L#1 SinglesLindsay Schall vs Giuliana Bolanos3-6, 3-6
2025-03-21vs AMehrizi (OPRC)Lost 01
L#1 DoublesEmily Hodge / Lindsay Schall vs Tiffany Eby / Caroleen Towery5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2025-03-14vs LHatfield (Palisades)Lost 01
L#2 DoublesLindsay Schall / Christina Murphy vs Laura Hatfield / Karen Davies2-6, 3-6
2025-03-07vs NDenton (Life Time)Won 10
W#3 DoublesTiffany Ashmore / Lindsay Schall vs Yesol Kwon / Brenley Ogden6-1, 6-2
2025-02-28vs TMacuga/Graham (Park Crossing)Won 10
W#1 SinglesLindsay Schall vs Kim Giusti6-2, 6-2
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 40 & Over Adult 3.0 Women 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 2.67 estimated across 14 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.

3.05
Deb Childress
published 3
2.96
Lindsay Schall
usually #1 Singles 29%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.96
Caroline Dudley
published 3
2.92
Kelli Narveson
published
2.71
Laura Satterly
published
2.69
Christina Murphy
published 3
2.68
Brittany Russell
published 2.5
2.63
Jessica Shannon
published
2.58
Emily Baker
published
2.55
Ginny Starnes
published
2.51
Claire Samuels
published 2.5
2.48
Quinn Goff
published
2.35
Tiffany Ashmore
published
2.33
Emily Hodge
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.

Christina Murphy + Brittany Russell123 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
Deb Childress
15W–5L career · no lines in 2025
<1%36%64%
3.05
3
Lindsay Schall
38W–18L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%60%40%
2.96
3
Caroline Dudley
11W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%62%38%
2.96
Kelli Narveson
14W–5L career · no lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
2.92
Laura Satterly
21W–8L career · no lines in 2025
0%7%93%
2.71
3
Christina Murphy
7W–10L career · no lines in 2025
9%90%1%
2.69
2.5
Brittany Russell
8W–3L career · no lines in 2025
0%10%90%
2.68
Jessica Shannon
2W–4L career · no lines in 2025
0%18%82%
2.63
Emily Baker
10W–8L career · no lines in 2025
0%27%73%
2.58
Ginny Starnes
10W–1L career · no lines in 2025
0%36%64%
2.55
2.5
Claire Samuels
11W–1L career · no lines in 2025
0%48%52%
2.51
Quinn Goff
3W–7L career · no lines in 2025
0%54%46%
2.48
Tiffany Ashmore
3W–5L career · no lines in 2025
0%86%14%
2.35
Emily Hodge
5W–2L career · no lines in 2025
0%88%12%
2.33

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.