Teams

Jackson, Susan

2026 Combo 18 & Over-JXN · Women 7.5

9 players · average NTRP 3.67 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-08-25vs Smith, AutumnWon 21
W#1 DoublesSusan Jackson / Anna Dotson vs Erin Dehon / Elizabeth Upchurch6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJennifer Evans / Cindy Page vs Beverly Turner / Ashley Howell7-5, 6-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesKathy Rhodes / Nan Dear vs Jordan Mitchell Walker / SarahEllen Krivanec6-4, 5-7, 0-1
2026-08-18vs Mitchell, ReJohnnaWon 21
W#1 DoublesJordan Goodwin / Nancy Thompson vs Emi Smith / Theresa Kennedy7-6, 5-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAngie DeLeon / Julie Thompson vs Charmel Chatmon / Morgan Ross6-3, 6-0
L#3 DoublesJennifer Evans / Anna Dotson vs Nyesha Nealon / Tempestt Gilmore3-6, 6-1, 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 standings5 teams · Women 7.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Jackson, Susan1021324
2Adams, Amber000000
3Brewer, Elise000000
4Campbell, Leslie000000
5Mitchell, ReJohnna0112534

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 3.24 estimated across 9 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.

3.64
Lauree Davis
published
3.60
Angie DeLeon
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.38
Anna Dotson
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.27
Cindy Page
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.27
Jordan Goodwin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.23
Emma Pullen
published
3.14
Kathy Rhodes
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.00
Tina Roberts
published
2.62
Nan Dear
usually #3 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.

Lauree Davis + Angie DeLeon4261% games−1.5% vs expected
Cindy Page + Emma Pullen3258% 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.

Lauree Davis
43W–8L career · no lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.64
4
Angie DeLeon
18W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
24%76%<1%
3.60
3.5
Anna Dotson
68W–43L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
3.38
3.5
Cindy Page
37W–30L career · 1 line in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Jordan Goodwin
17W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%3%97%
3.27
Emma Pullen
40W–14L career · no lines in 2026
<1%5%95%
3.23
Kathy Rhodes
12W–19L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%16%84%
3.14
Tina Roberts
24W–26L career · no lines in 2026
<1%49%51%
3.00
Nan Dear
14W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
19%81%<1%
2.62

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.