Teams

Smith/LF 3.5-4.5

2025 TUL TRI-LEVEL NIGHT 18 & Over League · WOMEN 3.5

13 players · average NTRP 4.00 / OKLAHOMA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-08-20vs Wood/SH 3.5-4.5Won 30
W#1 DoublesJennifer Linn Howard / Rachel Scroggs vs Caroline Snapp / Ashley Robert6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJodi Smith / Cheryl Barnard vs Terry Largent / Michelle Leonard6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesTrisha Millington / Marissa Devinney vs Zahidah Hyman / Mary Katherine Woodliff6-3, 6-7, 1-0
2025-08-18vs Night 1: Lee/LF 3.5-4.5Lost 12
W#1 DoublesJulie Heil / Jennifer Linn Howard vs Savannah Lee / Jasel Bailey3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJodi Smith / Cheryl Barnard vs Amy Gray / Stacy Upton3-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesStacy Teague / Casey Chonka vs Cathy Lee / Jenny Park5-7, 4-6
2025-08-07vs Haack/LF 3.5-4.5Lost 12
W#1 DoublesCheryl Hughes / Julie Heil vs Christine Rorabaugh / Julie Remy6-2, 6-0
L#2 DoublesJodi Smith / Angie Juarez vs Alyssa Andrew / Casey McKenzie0-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesCasey Chonka / Stacy Teague vs Michelle Pryer / Iris Griffin5-7, 0-6
2025-08-05vs Mitchell/LF 3.5-4.5Won 21
W#1 DoublesCheryl Hughes / Rachel Scroggs vs SAMANTHA MUNATSIREI / Sthephanie Mab6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJodi Smith / Angie Juarez vs Brenna DuBois / Lauren Hershberger1-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMarissa Devinney / Trisha Millington vs Michelle Dickason / Andrea Hayes1-6, 6-1, 0-1
2025-07-24vs Watling/SH 3.5-4.5Won 21
W#1 DoublesJennifer Linn Howard / Rachel Scroggs vs Mandy Obana / Lindsay Myers6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJodi Smith / Cheryl Barnard vs Wendy Brooks / Noel Groves6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesStacy Teague / Michelle Hendrickson vs Heather Duncan / TJ Warren5-7, 2-6
2025-07-14vs Huntley/LF 3.5-4.5Lost 12
W#1 DoublesJennifer Linn Howard / Julie Heil vs Lexus Reed / Chelsey Wolever6-1, 6-3
L#2 DoublesAngie Juarez / Cheryl Barnard vs Julianna Adams / Stefanie Lee6-2, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesCasey Chonka / Michelle Hendrickson vs Monica Henning / Sarah Martin2-6, 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 standings7 teams · WOMEN 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Night 1: Lee/LF 3.5-4.56012612135
2Haack/LF 3.5-4.54210818163
3Huntley/LF 3.5-4.5327819137
4Smith/LF 3.5-4.53310820155
5Mitchell/LF 3.5-4.52481025167
6Watling/SH 3.5-4.5147818145
7Wood/SH 3.5-4.51561226187

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 3.64 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.

4.48
Jennifer Linn Howard
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Cheryl Hughes
published 4.5
4.22
Julie Heil
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.08
Rachel Scroggs
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.64
Angie Juarez
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.59
Cheryl Barnard
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.40
Trisha Millington
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.36
Michelle Hendrickson
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
3.25
Stacy Teague
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.24
Marissa Devinney
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.17
Casey Chonka
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Jodi Smith
published
Sarah Davis
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.

Michelle Hendrickson + Trisha Millington9461% games+13.4% vs expected
Michelle Hendrickson + Stacy Teague14461% games+13.0% vs expected
Angie Juarez + Jodi Smith9163% games+10.8% vs expected
Stacy Teague + Trisha Millington4354% games+9.5% vs expected
Michelle Hendrickson + Marissa Devinney7554% games+5.5% vs expected
Marissa Devinney + Trisha Millington4454% games+2.6% vs expected
Cheryl Barnard + Angie Juarez4262% gamesnot enough data
Marissa Devinney + Stacy Teague5066% gamesnot 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.

Jennifer Linn Howard
86W–37L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%57%43%
4.48
4.5
Cheryl Hughes
32W–17L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Julie Heil
59W–26L career · 3 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
4.22
Rachel Scroggs
37W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
4.08
4
Angie Juarez
107W–66L career · 3 lines in 2025
15%85%<1%
3.64
4
Cheryl Barnard
89W–40L career · 4 lines in 2025
23%76%<1%
3.59
Trisha Millington
88W–35L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
3.40
Michelle Hendrickson
64W–32L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%85%15%
3.36
Stacy Teague
94W–42L career · 5 lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.25
Marissa Devinney
57W–49L career · 3 lines in 2025
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Casey Chonka
53W–40L career · 9 lines in 2025
10%89%<1%
3.17
Jodi Smith
19W–8L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Sarah Davis
32W–15L career · no 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.