Teams

Pulley/Nashville

2026 Combo 40 & Over - Nashville · 6.5 Women - MON AM

17 players · average NTRP 3.33 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2026-08-03vs Webster/Grove/NashvilleWon 30
W#1 DoublesMary Fetherling / Sarah Mcgee vs Jennie Reese / Angela Tatum6-0, 7-5
W#2 DoublesSusan Furman / Nancy Preston vs Tawnia McKiernan / Sarah Webster6-3, 5-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesStephanie Dunkle / Veronica Pulley vs Amy Bame / Tish Witkin6-1, 6-1
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 6.5 Women - MON AM 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 2.91 estimated across 16 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.

3.39
Mary Fetherling
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.28
3.27
Susan Furman
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.25
Melissa Hobbs
published
3.18
Gay Suiter
published
3.17
Stephanie Dunkle
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.06
Christa Gonzales
published 3.5
3.05
Kathryn Aupperlee
published
2.89
Nancy Preston
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.82
Veronica Pulley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.80
MaryBeth Comfort
published
Crystal Rudiger
published 3
2.64
Karen Vasil
published
2.57
Michelle Vandevier
published
2.53
Sarah Mcgee
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.44
Jenny Barnes
published
2.19
Katy Ridings
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.

Stephanie Dunkle + Veronica Pulley213 matchesnot enough data
Christine Toriscelli + Mary Fetherling303 matchesnot enough data
Jenny Barnes + Susan Furman123 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.

Mary Fetherling
20W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%78%22%
3.39
3.5
Christine Toriscelli
12W–10L career · no lines in 2026
2%92%5%
3.28
Susan Furman
8W–8L career · 1 line in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Melissa Hobbs
4W–4L career · no lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.25
Gay Suiter
13W–13L career · no lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.18
Stephanie Dunkle
10W–11L career · 1 line in 2026
11%88%1%
3.17
3.5
Christa Gonzales
6W–9L career · no lines in 2026
35%65%<1%
3.06
Kathryn Aupperlee
8W–3L career · no lines in 2026
<1%37%63%
3.05
Nancy Preston
7W–15L career · 1 line in 2026
78%22%<1%
2.89
Veronica Pulley
13W–16L career · 1 line in 2026
1%89%9%
2.82
MaryBeth Comfort
4W–7L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.80
3
Crystal Rudiger
3W–1L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Karen Vasil
11W–21L career · no lines in 2026
16%83%<1%
2.64
Michelle Vandevier
1W–10L career · no lines in 2026
32%68%<1%
2.57
Sarah Mcgee
16W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
0%43%57%
2.53
Jenny Barnes
4W–10L career · no lines in 2026
67%33%<1%
2.44
Katy Ridings
2W–11L career · no lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.19

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.