← Search

Lacey Keally

— year-end
114 matches · 73W–41L · seasons 2022–2026

Captains: add Lacey Keally to your scout list and get a weekly note on what they did. Create a free account to start one.

Match history114 matches
W
2026-09-13 · Williams/Nashville · #3 Doubles · 8.5 · with Sarah Gedney
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
3-6, 6-3, 1-0
L
2026-09-11 · Conyers/Vogel/Nashville · #3 Doubles · 7.5 · with Casey Parker
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
2-6, 1-6
L
2026-08-09 · Williams/Nashville · #3 Doubles · 8.5 · with Megan Everett
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
4-6, 6-7
L
2026-08-07 · Conyers/Vogel/Nashville · #2 Doubles · 7.5 · with Kate Long
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W
2026-07-03 · Burnstein/Nashville · #2 Doubles · 4.0 · with Julie Burnstein
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W
2026-07-01 · Burnstein/Nashville · #1 Doubles · 4.0 · with Stephanie Baas
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
6-2, 6-0
L
2026-06-30 · Burnstein/Nashville · #1 Doubles · 4.5 · with Tammy Fessler
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
2-6, 4-6
L
2026-06-29 · Burnstein/Nashville · #1 Doubles · 4.0 · with Stephanie Baas
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
6-3, 3-6, 0-1
L
2026-06-26 · Burnstein/Nashville · #2 Doubles · 4.0 · with Morgan Hinkley
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
2-6, 1-6
W
2026-06-10 · Burnstein/Nashville · #1 Doubles · 4.0 · with Whitney Conyers
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
6-3, 6-4
L
2026-06-05 · Burnstein/Nashville · #2 Doubles · 4.0 · with Briana Mullenax
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L
2026-06-03 · Burnstein/Nashville · #1 Doubles · 4.0 · with Whitney Conyers
expectation pending — we’re still fetching an opponent’s record
3-6, 0-6
Teams53 teams · 2021–2027
Over timerating by season, and how you rank
By level8 levels played
3.0
88.9%
24W–3L · 65.6% of games
3.5
65.9%
27W–14L · 60.8% of games
4.0
40.7%
11W–16L · 48.6% of games
4.5
0W–1L
not enough matches yet
5.5
3W–0L
not enough matches yet
6.5
83.3%
5W–1L · 62.1% of games
7.5
33.3%
2W–4L · 50% of games
8.5
1W–1L
not enough matches yet

Games won matters more than matches won — NTRP adjusts on margins.

By lineusually #1 Doubles, 32% of the time
#1 Doubles
32%
36 matches
#1 Singles
27%
31 matches
#2 Doubles
21%
24 matches
#3 Doubles
17%
19 matches
#2 Singles
3%
3 matches
#4 Doubles
1%
1 match

How often, across every team and every match we hold — including ones that do not count toward a rating. Advanced stats has a court-position table too, and it answers a different question: how well you do there, over matches that count. A team’s own page shows how that one team uses you.

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.

You have to take the initiative and play your game. Confidence is just believing you can do it.
Chris Evert