Teams

Rosenfeld/18/65/CWN/UCLUB

2026 BR Southern Combo 18 & Over - Women Night · 6.5 BR (18&O) Women Night

15 players · average NTRP 3.07 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 upcoming · 4 played
Sep 14 6:30 PM
Highland Park Tennis Center
Sep 21 6:30 PM
University Club Baton Rouge
Oct 5 6:30 PM
University Club Baton Rouge
2026-08-31vs Dang/18/6.5/CWN/BRECLost 12
L#1 DoublesMimi Shoenfelt / Jade McDowell vs Mary Raines / Cortney Wagner4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCarmen Lavergne / Catherine Rosenfeld vs Carly Erwin / Olivia Barry6-7, 3-6
W#3 DoublesMary Lacassin / Dianne Bourgeois vs Nina Gazmen / Aprille Wright6-1, 6-7, 1-0
2026-08-29vs Sivils/18/6.5/CWN/BocLost 02
L#1 DoublesCatherine Rosenfeld / Mary Lacassin vs Niki Hopkins / Jennifer Hataway4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCarmen Lavergne / Dianne Bourgeois vs Calli Sivils / Jill Kindler5-7, 7-6, 1-0
2026-08-20vs Arseneault/18/6.5/CWN/LEGACYLost 12
L#1 DoublesMary Lacassin / Stephanie Lyles vs Emily Ward / Bridgette Caruso1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJade McDowell / Patricia McCann vs Hilary Kennedy / Amanda Lewis1-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesMimi Shoenfelt / Amy Christian vs Kim Bowman / Emily Parks6-3, 7-6
2026-08-10vs Donadieu/18/6.5/CWN/SOACLost 12
L#1 DoublesCarmen Lavergne / Christine McKegney vs Chloe Collins Freeman / Britni Pritchard2-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesMary Lacassin / Elizabeth Castro vs Melissa Geci / Gretchen McCurley3-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesSummer Soileau / Alexis Oliver vs Missy Begue / Sherry Tucker6-2, 5-7, 1-0
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 standings8 teams · 6.5 BR (18&O) Women Night
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Dang/18/6.5/CWN/BREC2042545
2Arseneault/18/6.5/CWN/LEGACY1030022
3Mannino/18/6.5/CWN/UC1030120
4Donadieu/18/6.5/CWN/SOAC1021224
5Rosenfeld/18/65/CWN/UCLUB0112534
6Sivils/18/6.5/CWN/Boc0112537
7Callegan/18/6.5/CWN/BREC0103637
8Waguespack/18/6.5/CWN/BREC02151166

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 2.88 estimated across 15 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.

3.24
Mary Lacassin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.23
Carmen Lavergne
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.21
Mimi Shoenfelt
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.13
Dianne Bourgeois
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
3.12
Summer Soileau
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.94
Alexis Oliver
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.88
Christine McKegney
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.85
Elizabeth Castro
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.83
Amy Christian
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.80
Catherine Rosenfeld
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.75
Patricia McCann
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.73
Claire Wicker
published 3
2.72
Jade McDowell
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.68
Stephanie Lyles
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.11
Jenna Fritscher
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · 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.

Jade McDowell + Alexis Oliver4258% games+10.7% vs expected
Catherine Rosenfeld + Alexis Oliver4154% games+3.5% vs expected
Dianne Bourgeois + Claire Wicker3354% games−3.4% vs expected
Christine McKegney + Catherine Rosenfeld5450% games−3.8% vs expected
Christine McKegney + Alexis Oliver404 matchesnot enough data
Catherine Rosenfeld + Carmen Lavergne224 matchesnot enough data
Mary Lacassin + Catherine Rosenfeld213 matchesnot enough data
Elizabeth Castro + Amy Christian303 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.

Mary Lacassin
11W–14L career · 4 lines in 2026
4%92%3%
3.24
3.5
Carmen Lavergne
27W–24L career · 3 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.23
Mimi Shoenfelt
25W–9L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.21
3
Dianne Bourgeois
11W–7L career · type A · 2 lines in 2026
<1%19%81%
3.13
Summer Soileau
24W–14L career · 1 line in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.12
3
Alexis Oliver
22W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%67%33%
2.94
3
Christine McKegney
18W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%81%19%
2.88
Elizabeth Castro
16W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
1%85%15%
2.85
3
Amy Christian
15W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
1%87%12%
2.83
3
Catherine Rosenfeld
36W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.80
Patricia McCann
7W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
4%93%4%
2.75
3
Claire Wicker
7W–7L career · no lines in 2026
5%92%2%
2.73
Jade McDowell
12W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
2.72
Stephanie Lyles
11W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
9%89%1%
2.68
Jenna Fritscher
10W–13L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.11

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.