Teams

Skarica/18s/3.5/TCH

2025 Man · Cov Mixed 18 & Over

20 players · average NTRP 3.38 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-07-18Split 11
W#1 DoublesCharles Renwick / Renee Pellissier vs Tyler Crochet / Chantel Freeman7-6, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMallory Skarica / Jeffry Howell vs Kaitlyn Wells / Danny Wells1-6, 1-6
2025-07-12Won 10
W#1 DoublesStephen Raggio / Renee Pellissier vs Reagan Daskalova / Taylor Holley6-4, 6-7, 1-0
2025-06-27Lost 01
L#3 DoublesRenee Pellissier / Nader Shourbaji vs Wayne Songy / Abby Hunt4-6, 2-6
2025-06-21Lost 01
L#1 DoublesCiana McDaniel / Jeffry Howell vs Stephanie Rolling / Jason Rolling4-6, 2-6
2025-05-16vs Parvizian/18s/3.5/SCWon 10
W#3 DoublesMallory Skarica / Jeffry Howell vs Suzanne Roy / Ryan Richard Jr7-5, 3-6, 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 standings for Cov Mixed 18 & Over 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 3.26 estimated across 4 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
Brittany Graybill
usually #2 Doubles 37%, also #1 Singles 30% · published 3.5
3.31
Charles Renwick
usually #2 Doubles 41%, also #1 Doubles 41% · published 3.5
Ciana McDaniel
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.22
Michael Bethea
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.02
Dallas Swan
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Jane Carrey
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 22% · published
Jeffry Howell
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Lauren Renwick
usually #3 Doubles 72%, also #2 Doubles 28% · published
Layne Neitzschman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 30% · published
Mallory Skarica
usually #3 Doubles 35%, also #1 Singles 23% · published
Mary Ann Bruno
usually #1 Doubles 41%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Michael Tilly
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Nader Shourbaji
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 26% · published
Pasko Skarica
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published
Renee Pellissier
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Rhonda Eckholdt
usually #2 Doubles 47%, also #1 Doubles 41% · published
Ryan Nash
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Shawn Potter
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Stephanie Nash
usually #3 Doubles 32%, also #1 Doubles 32% · published
Stephen Raggio
usually #2 Doubles 47%, also #3 Doubles 27% · 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.

Stephen Raggio + Layne Neitzschman5452% gamesnot enough data
Ryan Nash + Stephanie Nash3257% gamesnot enough data
Charles Renwick + Dallas Swan224 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Nash + Jane Carrey404 matchesnot enough data
Michael Tilly + Ryan Nash213 matchesnot enough data
Shawn Potter + Rhonda Eckholdt303 matchesnot enough data
Charles Renwick + Renee Pellissier213 matchesnot enough data
Ryan Nash + Pasko Skarica213 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.

3.5
Brittany Graybill
32W–10L career · 27 lines in 2025
<1%55%45%
3.48
3.5
Charles Renwick
11W–11L career · 17 lines in 2025
1%92%8%
3.31
3.5
Ciana McDaniel
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Michael Bethea
13W–15L career · 4 lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.22
3
Dallas Swan
17W–4L career · 9 lines in 2025
<1%44%56%
3.02
Jane Carrey
18W–8L career · 17 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jeffry Howell
3W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Lauren Renwick
12W–7L career · 18 lines in 2025
not enough data
Layne Neitzschman
18W–8L career · 10 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mallory Skarica
11W–33L career · 24 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary Ann Bruno
14W–16L career · 17 lines in 2025
not enough data
Michael Tilly
5W–8L career · 12 lines in 2025
not enough data
Nader Shourbaji
8W–26L career · 26 lines in 2025
not enough data
Pasko Skarica
15W–8L career · 17 lines in 2025
not enough data
Renee Pellissier
5W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Rhonda Eckholdt
35W–28L career · 34 lines in 2025
not enough data
Ryan Nash
11W–16L career · 14 lines in 2025
not enough data
Shawn Potter
11W–1L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stephanie Nash
29W–16L career · 24 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stephen Raggio
20W–12L career · 14 lines in 2025
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.