Teams

Meullenet/Fayetteville/SRC

2024 Adult Singles 40 & Over · 3.0 Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.00 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-02-02vs Erickson/Springdale/INDWon 20
W#1 SinglesNatalie Mayer vs Samantha Thiede Erickson6-1, 6-2
W#2 SinglesSherry Carpenter vs Elizabeth Dizney6-4, 7-5
2025-01-19vs Long-Riley/Fayetteville/FACLost 12
W#1 SinglesNatalie Mayer vs Julie Ralston6-3, 6-4
L#2 SinglesLaura Hodges vs Jenna Donnell0-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesCynthia Meullenet vs Brandy Long6-4, 5-7, 0-1
2025-01-12vs Fitzgerald/Rogers/MRCWon 21
L#1 SinglesLeigh Verucchi vs Heather Snell0-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesBecca Bertram vs Melissa Smith6-4, 7-5
W#3 SinglesNatalie Mayer vs Jennifer Burleson6-1, 6-1
2025-01-08vs Erickson/Springdale/INDWon 20
W#1 SinglesSherry Carpenter vs Elizabeth Dizney6-4, 6-3
W#2 SinglesNatalie Mayer vs Samantha Thiede Erickson6-1, 6-2
2024-12-14vs Fitzgerald/Rogers/MRCWon 21
W#1 SinglesBecca Bertram vs Mandy Shelton6-3, 6-2
W#2 SinglesLaura Hodges vs Sherry Fitzgerald6-3, 6-4
L#3 SinglesCynthia Meullenet vs Brandi Mallard6-7, 5-7
2024-12-04vs Long-Riley/Fayetteville/FACLost 03
L#1 SinglesSherry Carpenter vs Susan Murray2-6, 0-6
L#2 SinglesLaura Hodges vs Lyndsey Weber6-7, 3-6
L#3 SinglesLeigh Verucchi vs Brandy Long2-6, 1-6
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 standings for 3.0 Women have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 2.81 estimated across 6 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.

3.45
Natalie Mayer
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 25% · published
2.89
Becca Bertram
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3
2.74
Cynthia Meullenet
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.67
Laura Hodges
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
2.66
Sherry Carpenter
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.44
Leigh Verucchi
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 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.

Laura Hodges + Leigh Verucchi1435% games+3.4% vs expected
Cynthia Meullenet + Becca Bertram134 matchesnot enough data
Sherry Carpenter + Leigh Verucchi134 matchesnot enough data
Cynthia Meullenet + Leigh Verucchi033 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.

Natalie Mayer
38W–14L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%63%37%
3.45
3
Becca Bertram
27W–23L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%78%22%
2.89
3
Cynthia Meullenet
28W–37L career · 2 lines in 2024
4%93%3%
2.74
Laura Hodges
2W–8L career · 3 lines in 2024
12%87%1%
2.67
Sherry Carpenter
14W–30L career · 3 lines in 2024
13%86%1%
2.66
Leigh Verucchi
3W–34L career · 2 lines in 2024
67%33%<1%
2.44

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.