Teams

Hancock

ADULT 40 & Over · 3.5 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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
2026-02-23vs MeyerWon 31
W#1 DoublesAngela Bailey / Kayla Potts vs Audrey Andrews / Kristin Pinkstaff7-5, 6-1
W#1 SinglesLauren Ratcliff vs Jennifer Crow6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDorcas Gonzales / Pat Haygood vs Melissa Meyer / Amy Gaston3-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesPenny Digby / Cathy Foreman vs Febes Kavanagh / Nancy Risinger7-5, 6-2
2026-02-21vs MeyerLost 13
L#1 DoublesDebbie Curry / Penny Digby vs Melissa Meyer / Kristin Pinkstaff3-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesJana Kuz vs Brittney Corley1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesAmy Hancock / Kayla Potts vs Amy Fields / Sarah Pick6-0, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesLauren Ratcliff / Angela Bailey vs Nancy Risinger / Jennifer Crow6-2, 6-3
2026-02-11vs MeyerLost 13
W#1 DoublesCindy Bittenbinder / Kayla Potts vs Febes Kavanagh / Nancy Risinger6-1, 6-2
L#1 SinglesLauren Ratcliff vs Carol Paull1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesDebbie Curry / Amy Hancock vs Melissa Meyer / Kristin Pinkstaff6-7, 4-6
L#3 DoublesCathy Foreman / Dorcas Gonzales vs Brittney Corley / Jennifer Crow3-6, 5-7
2026-02-07vs MeyerLost 13
W#1 DoublesYvette Marietta / Shana Jeter vs Sarah Pick / Nancy Risinger6-2, 6-2
L#1 SinglesJana Kuz vs Carol Paull2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesCindy Bittenbinder / Angela Bailey vs Amy Fields / Brittney Corley6-3, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesAmy Hancock / Pat Haygood vs Melissa Meyer / Kristin Pinkstaff6-4, 5-7, 0-1
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 standings1 teams · 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Hancock1361021149

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 3.20 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.

3.53
Kayla Potts
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.41
Yvette Marietta
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.40
Angela Bailey
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.39
Cindy Bittenbinder
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.34
Shana Jeter
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.20
Amy Hancock
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.18
Cathy Foreman
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.17
Dorcas Gonzales
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.13
Debbie Curry
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.11
Pat Haygood
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.05
Lauren Ratcliff
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.99
Penny Digby
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.98
Christine Rahm
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.87
Jana Kuz
usually #1 Singles 100% · 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.

Cindy Bittenbinder + Kayla Potts6163% games+15.4% vs expected
Debbie Curry + Amy Hancock9750% games+1.7% vs expected
Pat Haygood + Cindy Bittenbinder2543% games+0.9% vs expected
Shana Jeter + Angela Bailey4649% games−5.3% vs expected
Debbie Curry + Christine Rahm0537% gamesnot enough data
Debbie Curry + Pat Haygood314 matchesnot enough data
Penny Digby + Cathy Foreman123 matchesnot enough data
Debbie Curry + Cathy Foreman303 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.

Kayla Potts
57W–31L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%41%59%
3.53
3.5
Yvette Marietta
89W–62L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%76%24%
3.41
3.5
Angela Bailey
37W–28L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%78%22%
3.40
3.5
Cindy Bittenbinder
93W–60L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
3.39
Shana Jeter
58W–40L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%89%10%
3.34
3.5
Amy Hancock
71W–74L career · 5 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
3.20
3.5
Cathy Foreman
22W–38L career · 4 lines in 2026
8%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Dorcas Gonzales
3W–4L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.17
3.5
Debbie Curry
23W–24L career · 2 lines in 2026
16%84%<1%
3.13
Pat Haygood
33W–45L career · 2 lines in 2026
19%80%<1%
3.11
Lauren Ratcliff
45W–51L career · 3 lines in 2026
35%65%<1%
3.05
Penny Digby
60W–63L career · 2 lines in 2026
53%47%<1%
2.99
3.5
Christine Rahm
16W–46L career · 2 lines in 2026
57%43%<1%
2.98
Jana Kuz
18W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
84%16%<1%
2.87

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.