Teams

Reeves 5.5 40+

2026 Combo 40 & Over · 5.5 Adult 40 Women

9 players · average NTRP 2.75 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-08-31vs Walker 5.5 40+Won 21
W#1 DoublesPaula Pounders / Tracie Thompson vs Melissa Hargett / Bethany Honey6-2, 7-6
L#2 DoublesMelissa Aycock / Rita Fisher vs Dana Hill / Tori Bendall4-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesAmy Reeves / Julie Newell vs Tammy Willis / Rhonda Pounders7-5, 6-4
2026-08-27vs Walker 5.5 40+Lost 12
W#1 DoublesEmily Hammock / Paula Pounders vs Nina McNatt / Melissa Hargett6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesTheresa Burns / Veronica Stancil vs Rhonda Pounders / Tori Bendall3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesAmy Reeves / Julie Newell vs Bethany Honey / Dana Hill6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2026-08-24vs Walker 5.5 40+Won 30
W#1 DoublesEmily Hammock / Jill Archer vs Nina McNatt / Tori Bendall7-6, 6-0
W#2 DoublesRita Fisher / Melissa Aycock vs Cindy Walker / Melissa Hargett6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesTracie Thompson / Veronica Stancil vs Tammy Willis / Amanda Davis4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2026-08-10vs Walker 5.5 40+Won 21
L#1 DoublesJill Archer / Tracie Thompson vs Cindy Walker / Nina McNatt1-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesRita Fisher / Paula Pounders vs Tori Bendall / Lorie Scott7-5, 6-2
W#3 DoublesTheresa Burns / Veronica Stancil vs Amanda Davis / Bethany Honey6-3, 6-3
2026-08-03vs Walker 5.5 40+Won 30
W#1 DoublesAmy Reeves / Rita Fisher vs Cindy Walker / Lorie Scott6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesPaula Pounders / Tracie Thompson vs Tammy Willis / Amanda Davis6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMelissa Aycock / Theresa Burns vs Nina McNatt / Rhonda Pounders4-6, 6-3, 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 standings2 teams · 5.5 Adult 40 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Reeves 5.5 40+2051339
2Walker 5.5 40+02151067

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 2.42 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.

2.90
Amy Reeves
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.74
Paula Pounders
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
2.58
Melissa Aycock
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
2.56
Emily Hammock
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.35
Tracie Thompson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.35
Veronica Stancil
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
2.12
Rita Fisher
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.08
Theresa Burns
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.08
Julie Newell
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.

Amy Reeves + Melissa Aycock4256% games+13.6% vs expected
Amy Reeves + Paula Pounders9459% games+13.1% vs expected
Melissa Aycock + Paula Pounders2452% games+10.5% vs expected
Theresa Burns + Emily Hammock4450% games−0.8% vs expected
Veronica Stancil + Amy Reeves5067% gamesnot enough data
Rita Fisher + Theresa Burns044 matchesnot enough data
Emily Hammock + Tracie Thompson224 matchesnot enough data
Rita Fisher + Veronica Stancil123 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.

3
Amy Reeves
44W–39L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%78%22%
2.90
Paula Pounders
24W–28L career · 7 lines in 2026
3%95%2%
2.74
Melissa Aycock
29W–38L career · 7 lines in 2026
0%27%73%
2.58
2.5
Emily Hammock
14W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%33%67%
2.56
Tracie Thompson
10W–13L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%87%13%
2.35
Veronica Stancil
26W–28L career · 6 lines in 2026
0%88%12%
2.35
Rita Fisher
10W–30L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.12
Theresa Burns
14W–24L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.08
Julie Newell
3W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.08

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.