Teams

Miller/Knoxville

2026 Combo 40 & Over- Knoxville · 8.5 Women Combo Doubles

10 players · average NTRP 4.17 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-08-29vs Gingrich/KnoxvilleWon 20
W#2 DoublesLauren Clarke / Rachel Kimmel vs Jennifer Bell / Jennifer Oakley6-4, 7-5
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Whelpley / Tara Hurley vs Mei Ling Gingrich / Amy Fisher6-4, 6-4
2026-08-28vs Kirby/KnoxvilleWon 21
L#1 DoublesAmanda Wilson / Deanna Unger vs Kristie Danby / Lynn Johnson4-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesKaren Lorino / Brooke Browning vs Stacey Bristow / Marissa Turner6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesWendy Petty / Rachel Kimmel vs Liz Mcclain / Kelly Barger6-3, 6-3
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 8.5 Women Combo Doubles 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 3.99 estimated across 10 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.

4.41
Karen Lorino
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
4.20
Misty Cottrell
published
4.12
Elizabeth Whelpley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.12
Kate Willis
published
3.99
Rachel Kimmel
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.94
Deanna Unger
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.92
Brooke Browning
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.81
Wendy Petty
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.73
Tara Hurley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.72
Lauren Clarke
usually #2 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.

Karen Lorino + Kate Willis8271% games+8.4% vs expected
Misty Cottrell + Rachel Kimmel8162% gamesnot enough data
Tara Hurley + Brooke Browning6072% gamesnot enough data
Misty Cottrell + Kate Willis5161% gamesnot enough data
Tara Hurley + Lauren Clarke123 matchesnot enough data
Brooke Browning + Karen Lorino303 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.

Karen Lorino
24W–3L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%76%23%
4.41
Misty Cottrell
34W–11L career · no lines in 2026
6%93%1%
4.20
4.5
Elizabeth Whelpley
10W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
18%81%<1%
4.12
Kate Willis
27W–8L career · no lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
4.12
Rachel Kimmel
36W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
54%46%<1%
3.99
4
Deanna Unger
45W–10L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%67%32%
3.94
4
Brooke Browning
38W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%72%28%
3.92
Wendy Petty
12W–20L career · 1 line in 2026
1%91%8%
3.81
Tara Hurley
38W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
4%94%2%
3.73
Lauren Clarke
35W–16L career · 1 line in 2026
5%94%1%
3.72

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.