Teams

Siler/Memphis

2026 Combo 18 & Over - Memphis · 7.5 18 & Over Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.50 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-27vs Bender/MemphisLost 03
L#1 DoublesCindy Miller / Melinda Hoehn vs Missy Euler / Deise Berger5-7, 6-7
L#2 DoublesAshley Huggins / Carrie Siler vs Kelly Gill / Carly McWatters2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJorianne Siskin / Natalie Royal vs Taylor Bender / Abby Spann2-6, 3-6
2026-08-20vs Goetsch/MemphisWon 21
W#1 DoublesRachel Baker / Marta Mullinix vs Dianna Ptacek / Meg Smith6-4, 6-0
L#2 DoublesCarrie Siler / Cindy Miller vs Lydia Farmer / Tammy Chapman4-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesNatalie Royal / Jorianne Siskin vs Tiffany Knighton / Adrienne Herbek3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2026-08-13vs Washburn/MemphisLost 03
L#1 DoublesCarrie Siler / Jorianne Siskin vs Chelsey Savage / Katie Savage1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesMelinda Hoehn / Cindy Miller vs Wendi Mihalko / E'Lane Williams4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesRachel Baker / Ashley Huggins vs Kristen Griffith / Finy Shirley0-6, 3-6
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 standings for 7.5 18 & 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 3.24 estimated across 8 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.

3.63
Rachel Baker
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.50
Jorianne Siskin
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.31
Carrie Siler
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.25
Melinda Hoehn
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.21
Marta Mullinix
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.21
Karin Rubnitz
published
2.97
Natalie Royal
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.87
Ashley Huggins
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
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.

Marta Mullinix + Carrie Siler151150% games+0.2% vs expected
Natalie Royal + Karin Rubnitz4162% gamesnot enough data
Carrie Siler + Ashley Huggins224 matchesnot enough data
Melinda Hoehn + Rachel Baker123 matchesnot enough data
Melinda Hoehn + Carrie Siler033 matchesnot enough data
Rachel Baker + Jorianne Siskin123 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.

Rachel Baker
16W–18L career · 4 lines in 2026
18%82%<1%
3.63
Jorianne Siskin
13W–27L career · 3 lines in 2026
50%50%<1%
3.50
3.5
Carrie Siler
30W–28L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%90%8%
3.31
Melinda Hoehn
15W–29L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.25
Marta Mullinix
22W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
6%92%2%
3.21
Karin Rubnitz
9W–9L career · no lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.21
Natalie Royal
6W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
58%42%<1%
2.97
3.5
Ashley Huggins
5W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
82%18%<1%
2.87

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.