Teams

All the single ladies/Knight BBTC

2025 Singles League 18 & Over-GC · Women 3.0

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-11-19vs Blevins TOCCWon 10
W#2 SinglesTrisa Clark vs Shari Newman6-0, 6-4
2025-11-13vs OSTC - VoLost 02
L#2 SinglesDana Delvescovo vs Carlie Saylor4-6, 3-6
L#3 SinglesJolene McMorran vs Alison Campbell2-6, 4-6
2025-11-06vs BBTC Matthews SinglesLost 12
L#1 SinglesDana Delvescovo vs Stacey Rishel5-7, 3-6
L#2 SinglesAdrianne Jones vs Tina Murray3-6, 5-7
W#3 SinglesMelissa Steenkamp vs Julie Pace6-0, 6-2
2025-11-03vs Gartman - BiloxiWon 21
L#1 SinglesCarrie Fish vs Catherine Wood1-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesAdrianne Jones vs Beth Seymour7-6, 6-4
W#3 SinglesShirley Brehm vs Kelly Robinson6-1, 6-7, 1-0
2025-10-28vs Diamondhead-PowellLost 12
L#1 SinglesTrisa Clark vs Rebecca Powell4-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesDana Delvescovo vs Eliza Easton7-6, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 SinglesMelissa Steenkamp vs Danielle Keeton6-3, 6-2
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 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1BBTC Matthews Singles4211714132
2OSTC - Vo4211715130
3St. Martin-Mathews236919139
4Diamondhead-Powell2471124183
5All the single ladies/Knight BBTC146919145

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 2.72 estimated across 8 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.

2.96
Wendy Ray
published
2.88
Adrianne Jones
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
2.82
Shirley Brehm
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
2.79
Jolene McMorran
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
2.66
Carrie Fish
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
2.60
Dana Delvescovo
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3
2.58
Melissa Steenkamp
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
2.50
Trisa Clark
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · 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.

Melissa Steenkamp + Wendy Ray3256% gamesnot enough data
Shirley Brehm + Dana Delvescovo123 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.

Wendy Ray
55W–28L career · no lines in 2025
<1%62%38%
2.96
3
Adrianne Jones
18W–25L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
2.88
Shirley Brehm
68W–85L career · 1 line in 2025
1%91%8%
2.82
Jolene McMorran
51W–66L career · 1 line in 2025
1%94%5%
2.79
3
Carrie Fish
24W–29L career · 1 line in 2025
11%88%<1%
2.66
3
Dana Delvescovo
33W–46L career · 3 lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
2.60
Melissa Steenkamp
39W–48L career · 2 lines in 2025
27%73%<1%
2.58
Trisa Clark
2W–42L career · 2 lines in 2025
49%51%<1%
2.50

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.