Teams

Gilliam/FS/Hangout

2026 Mixed 18 & Over 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 · 3.5 Mixed

8 players · average NTRP 3.50 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-07-21vs Williams/FS/VHLost 12
L#1 DoublesMel Schaefer / Stephen Schaefer vs Joshua Kilgore / Jessica Irgens4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesDzung Vu / Glenna Gilliam vs Shane Irgens / Emillie Vick6-1, 6-1
L#3 DoublesNathan Marcotte / Caroline Beneux vs Mark Hoskyn / Britney Taake1-6, 4-6
2026-07-19vs Williams/FS/VHLost 12
L#1 DoublesJennifer Jenkins / Joshua Jenkins vs Joshua Kilgore / Katy Prater1-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesCharles Warren / Mel Schaefer vs Shane Irgens / Jessica Irgens6-2, 7-5
L#3 DoublesDzung Vu / Glenna Gilliam vs Nathan Garner / Christy Williams4-6, 6-2, 0-1
2026-07-16vs Williams/FS/VHLost 12
L#1 DoublesNathan Marcotte / Lisa Parker vs Mark Hoskyn / Britney Taake3-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesDzung Vu / Caroline Beneux vs Joshua Kilgore / Katy Prater4-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesStephen Schaefer / Mel Schaefer vs Nathan Garner / Emillie Vick6-2, 7-5
2026-07-09vs Williams/FS/VHWon 21
W#1 DoublesNathan Marcotte / Lisa Parker vs Joshua Kilgore / Emillie Vick6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesCharles Warren / Caroline Beneux vs Christy Williams / Shane Irgens6-4, 6-3
L#3 DoublesMel Schaefer / Stephen Schaefer vs Jessica Irgens / Mark Hoskyn1-6, 3-6
2026-06-30vs Williams/FS/VHLost 12
W#1 DoublesNathan Marcotte / Caroline Beneux vs Shane Irgens / Katy Prater6-0, 6-4
L#2 DoublesDzung Vu / Mel Schaefer vs Mark Hoskyn / Britney Taake4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJoshua Jenkins / Jennifer Jenkins vs Joshua Kilgore / Christy Williams6-7, 6-2, 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 standings2 teams · 3.5 Mixed
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Williams/FS/VH419614142
2Gilliam/FS/Hangout146918138

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 3.17 estimated across 7 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.

3.48
Charles Warren
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.41
Dzung Vu
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.26
Caroline Beneux
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.25
Nathan Marcotte
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.17
Jennifer Jenkins
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.83
Mel Schaefer
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
2.81
Glenna Gilliam
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Joshua Jenkins
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
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.

3.5
Charles Warren
11W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%55%45%
3.48
Dzung Vu
5W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%75%25%
3.41
3.5
Caroline Beneux
2W–2L career · type S · 4 lines in 2026
3%92%4%
3.26
Nathan Marcotte
8W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
3.25
Jennifer Jenkins
14W–22L career · 2 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.17
Mel Schaefer
12W–20L career · 5 lines in 2026
89%11%<1%
2.83
Glenna Gilliam
37W–26L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
2.81
Joshua Jenkins
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
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.