Teams

AYoung/Chattanooga

2024 Combo 40 & Over-Chattanooga · 6.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.12 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2024-10-08vs Kristan-Rauth/ChattanoogaSplit 11
L#2 DoublesJenny Howell / Leanne Morrow vs Ashley Sorrow / Mary Anne Kristan2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesEllan Hubbard / Bernadette Dorris vs Beth Miller / Theresa Jones6-0, 7-5
2024-10-05vs Kristan-Rauth/ChattanoogaSplit 11
L#1 DoublesJenny Howell / Leanne Morrow vs Regina Greer / Terri Brunvoll1-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesKay Henderson / Bernadette Dorris vs Edith Calhoun / Kelley Finnell6-4, 6-4
2024-10-02vs Young/ChattanoogaLost 03
L#1 DoublesCathy McDonald / Kay Henderson vs Susan Bosworth / April Chambers6-2, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesEllan Hubbard / Marilyn Wright vs Michelle Larson / Lucynda Cynda Holmes2-5
L#3 DoublesBernadette Dorris / Emma Veys vs Jessica Carter / Marialice Hatch0-6, 0-6
2024-09-22vs Young/ChattanoogaLost 02
L#1 DoublesPaula Reagan / Anne Stone vs Michelle Larson / Lucynda Cynda Holmes1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesEmma Veys / Cielene Aleksejus vs Janet Lawrence / Jana Henson6-2, 1-6, 0-1
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 standings2 teams · 6.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Kristan-Rauth/Chattanooga31751293
2AYoung/Chattanooga043918115

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 2.91 estimated across 6 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.

3.44
Ellan Hubbard
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.90
Kay Henderson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.85
Cielene Aleksejus
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.84
Bernadette Dorris
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Anne Stone
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.73
Paula Reagan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.67
Leanne Morrow
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Cathy McDonald
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Emma Veys
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Jenny Howell
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Bernadette Dorris + Paula Reagan134 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
Ellan Hubbard
10W–4L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%67%32%
3.44
Kay Henderson
49W–40L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%77%23%
2.90
3
Cielene Aleksejus
4W–14L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%87%12%
2.85
3
Bernadette Dorris
7W–7L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%88%11%
2.84
3
Anne Stone
3W–1L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Paula Reagan
5W–7L career · 1 line in 2024
4%94%2%
2.73
Leanne Morrow
3W–10L career · 2 lines in 2024
10%90%1%
2.67
Cathy McDonald
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Emma Veys
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Jenny Howell
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2024
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.