Teams

Mendoza/Memphis

2025 Combo 40 & Over - Memphis · 5.5 40 & Over Women

13 players · average NTRP 2.75 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-09-17vs Kendall/MemphisLost 12
W#1 DoublesKathy Crowder / Shannon Boyd vs PENNY WILKINS / Barbara Wilson6-1, 6-1
L#2 DoublesRoz Wallace / Rebecca Hannaman vs Jodi Kendall / Barbara Halliburton3-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesCarrie Moore / Xiaoqun Akers vs Nancy Rose / Amanda Scott3-6, 4-6
2025-09-07vs Kendall/MemphisLost 12
W#1 DoublesChristine Mendoza / Gail Gray vs Angie Moore / Candi McMorran6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesCheryl Murphy / Rebecca Hannaman vs Angela Wehmeyer / Amanda Scott6-7, 6-7
L#3 DoublesKrista Weber / Becky Brady vs Nancy Rose / Susanna Evalenko0-6, 6-2, 0-1
2025-08-17vs Kendall/MemphisWon 21
W#1 DoublesChristine Mendoza / Gail Gray vs Jodi Kendall / Susanna Evalenko6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesSalina Xu / Becky Brady vs Jennifer Green / Candi McMorran3-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#3 DoublesKathy Crowder / Susan Patrone vs PENNY WILKINS / Brenda Kinney3-6, 5-7
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 5.5 40 & Over 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 2.61 estimated across 12 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.

3.00
Krista Weber
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
2.92
Cheryl Murphy
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.92
Christine Mendoza
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.86
Salina Xu
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.75
Xiaoqun Akers
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.68
Roz Wallace
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.58
Rebecca Hannaman
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.48
Spring Parsons
published
2.44
Susan Patrone
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.34
Gail Gray
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.30
Becky Brady
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.10
Beth Price
published 2.5
Kathy Crowder
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Salina Xu + Xiaoqun Akers4746% games−0.7% vs expected
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.

Krista Weber
28W–19L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%50%50%
3.00
3
Cheryl Murphy
40W–29L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%70%30%
2.92
3
Christine Mendoza
16W–19L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%71%29%
2.92
Salina Xu
11W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
1%84%16%
2.86
Xiaoqun Akers
18W–40L career · 1 line in 2025
4%93%4%
2.75
Roz Wallace
9W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
10%89%1%
2.68
Rebecca Hannaman
11W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%29%71%
2.58
Spring Parsons
6W–13L career · no lines in 2025
55%45%<1%
2.48
Susan Patrone
18W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%65%35%
2.44
Gail Gray
12W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%87%13%
2.34
2.5
Becky Brady
8W–16L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%92%8%
2.30
2.5
Beth Price
13W–11L career · no lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.10
Kathy Crowder
8W–15L career · 3 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.