Teams

MT Blend

2026 USTA MIXED 18 & OVER · 7.0 Mixed 18 & Over

8 players · average NTRP 3.60 / MONTANA

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
2026-03-01vs Double TroubleLost 02
L#1 DoublesDana Miller / Heather Bergeson vs Lori Faure / Brandon Moore2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCheryl Scott / Brian Scott vs Susie Boyer / Carlos Valerio1-6, 3-6
2026-02-28vs DesinLost 03
L#1 DoublesCheryl Scott / Brian Scott vs Cindy Woods / Brady Mcginley4-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJackie Yamanaka-Williams / Brock Fricke vs Ruby Graham / Luke Holden2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesDana Miller / Heather Bergeson vs James Shaffer / Emily McRady5-7, 3-6
2026-02-28vs Double TroubleWon 21
L#1 DoublesJackie Yamanaka-Williams / Ethan Carney vs Paul Cross / Julia Haggerty1-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesBrock Fricke / Alison Pelatt vs Carlos Valerio / Suzanne Taylor2-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCheryl Scott / Brian Scott vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2026-02-27vs DesinLost 03
L#1 DoublesBrock Fricke / Alison Pelatt vs Cyndy Desin / Darin Newton1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesBrian Scott / Cheryl Scott vs Ruby Graham / Luke Holden0-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJackie Yamanaka-Williams / Ethan Carney vs Cindy Woods / Brady Mcginley3-6, 2-6
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 standings2 teams · 7.0 Mixed 18 & Over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Desin31102784
2MT Blend133919120

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 3.22 estimated across 3 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.

Dana Miller
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.26
Cheryl Scott
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Alison Pelatt
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.24
Brock Fricke
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.15
Brian Scott
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Ethan Carney
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Heather Bergeson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Jackie Yamanaka-Williams
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Brian Scott + Cheryl Scott0623% gamesnot 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.

4
Dana Miller
2W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Cheryl Scott
16W–29L career · 4 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.26
3.5
Alison Pelatt
1W–1L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Brock Fricke
1W–2L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
4%92%3%
3.24
3.5
Brian Scott
0W–17L career · type A · 3 lines in 2026
14%86%1%
3.15
Ethan Carney
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Heather Bergeson
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Jackie Yamanaka-Williams
0W–7L career · 3 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.