Teams

RID SELKING

2025 FW USTA Winter Social 18+ Ladies - N · A

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / TEXAS

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-02-14vs LTF LEIKER/TAYLORLost 12
W#1 DoublesMEREDITH CODY / Melinda Delk vs Amanda Conroy / Mary Berg6-1, 6-1
L#1 SinglesMegan Quirk vs Kiera Mathis3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesAshley Healey / Lauren Selking vs Molly Leiker / Holly Coker4-6, 3-6
2025-02-07vs RID DIAZWon 21
W#1 DoublesClaire Hollek / Whitney Perry vs CORTNEY Craft / Lauren Diaz6-0, 6-1
L#1 SinglesLauren Selking vs Elizabeth Harbuck4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesNatalie Moore / Megan Quirk vs Cailey Walton / Kat Scheurer6-0, 2-6, 1-0
2025-01-28vs LTF LEIKER/TAYLORWon 21
W#1 DoublesClaire Hollek / Melinda Delk vs Maggie Taylor / Mary Berg4-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#1 SinglesMEREDITH CODY vs Irene Hatfield6-0, 6-3
L#2 DoublesAshley Davis / Whitney Perry vs Kiera Mathis / Ashley Herndon1-6, 2-6
2025-01-03vs RID DIAZWon 21
W#1 DoublesLauren Selking / MEREDITH CODY vs Kat Scheurer / Cayla Grossman6-2, 6-2
L#1 SinglesMelinda Delk vs Elizabeth Harbuck5-7, 0-6
W#2 DoublesMegan Quirk / Ashley Healey vs Jeanie Armstrong / Sara Beaucond6-0, 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 A 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 2.79 estimated across 8 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.

3.18
MEREDITH CODY
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
2.97
Melinda Delk
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
2.83
Claire Hollek
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.80
Lauren Selking
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.80
Megan Quirk
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
2.64
Natalie Moore
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.56
Ashley Healey
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.54
Whitney Perry
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 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.

Melinda Delk + MEREDITH CODY9272% games+20.2% vs expected
Lauren Selking + MEREDITH CODY9257% games+16.2% vs expected
Melinda Delk + Claire Hollek5356% games+12.6% 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.

MEREDITH CODY
31W–10L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%10%90%
3.18
Melinda Delk
20W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%59%41%
2.97
3
Claire Hollek
8W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
2.83
Lauren Selking
18W–15L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
2.80
Megan Quirk
13W–8L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
2.80
Natalie Moore
5W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
16%84%1%
2.64
3
Ashley Healey
2W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
34%66%<1%
2.56
Whitney Perry
6W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
38%61%<1%
2.54

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.