Teams

Jambor 6.5 Combo

2025 Southern Combo Doubles 40 & Over - HSV · 6.5 Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.17 / ALABAMA

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 →
Schedule2 played
2025-09-02vs Moorer 40+ 6.5 comboLost 12
L#1 DoublesAllison Gregg / Beverly Allen vs Leslie Moorer / Jenny Gibson2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCarolyn Holt / Mary Young vs Caroline Garnett / Haley Chamness3-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesSharon Houston / Beth Berry vs Laura Jones / Nancy Stuart6-2, 6-3
2025-08-27vs Moorer 40+ 6.5 comboLost 12
W#1 DoublesBeverly Allen / Desiree McGann vs Ginger Moore / Laura Jones7-5, 6-4
L#2 DoublesSusan Jambor / Andrea Cantrell vs Jennifer Helton / Madeline Mullins1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAllison Gregg / Marjorie Williams vs Caroline Garnett / Nancy Stuart7-5, 1-6, 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 standings for 6.5 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 2.77 estimated across 10 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.

3.17
Michele Elliott
published
3.12
Desiree McGann
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.11
Carolyn Holt
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.83
Rhonda Thompson
published
2.78
Tracy McMahan
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Bonnie Maples
published 3
2.69
Allison Gregg
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.57
Beverly Allen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.53
Andrea Cantrell
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.46
Sharon Houston
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
2.44
Susan Jambor
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Mary Young
usually #2 Doubles 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.

Susan Jambor + Michele Elliott033 matchesnot enough data
Susan Jambor + Andrea Cantrell123 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.

Michele Elliott
15W–20L career · no lines in 2025
12%87%1%
3.17
3.5
Desiree McGann
5W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
19%80%<1%
3.12
3.5
Carolyn Holt
15W–46L career · 1 line in 2025
21%79%<1%
3.11
Rhonda Thompson
1W–8L career · no lines in 2025
89%11%<1%
2.83
Tracy McMahan
34W–40L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
2.78
3
Bonnie Maples
0W–13L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
3
Allison Gregg
11W–27L career · 2 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
2.69
3
Beverly Allen
9W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
2.57
3
Andrea Cantrell
7W–25L career · type A · 1 line in 2025
41%59%<1%
2.53
Sharon Houston
10W–23L career · 5 lines in 2025
61%39%<1%
2.46
Susan Jambor
1W–44L career · 1 line in 2025
68%32%<1%
2.44
Mary Young
0W–2L career · 1 line 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.