Teams

Sanderson/18/Div1/Tri-Lvl/Ruston

2026 Ruston Tri Level 18 & Over - Women · 3.5,3.0,2.5 Ruston (18&O) Women

11 players · average NTRP 2.67 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-08-02vs Johnson/18/Div1/Tri-Lvl/RustonWon 30
W#1 DoublesAnh Le / Taylor Weeks vs Jodi Marvin / Lynn Barron6-2, 6-0
W#2 DoublesSarah Keyes Jeffords / Tina Otwell vs Jessica Johnson / Tammy Roberts5-3
W#3 DoublesRegina McNeill / Kelley Ivey vs Tonya McCulloch / Beth Everett6-1, 6-0
2026-07-26vs McMaster/18/Div1/Tri-Lvl/RustonWon 20
W#2 DoublesTina Otwell / Brandy Roberson vs Shelby Daum / Mary Moore7-5, 6-1
W#3 DoublesCori Crittenden / Ashlea Price vs Anna Garmon / Sarah Terral6-0, 6-0
2026-07-12vs Johnson/18/Div1/Tri-Lvl/RustonWon 20
W#1 DoublesAnh Le / Taylor Weeks vs Emma Bowman / Lisa Davis6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDonna Wilburn / Jennifer Sanderson vs Shelly Fielder / Tammy Roberts6-2, 6-3
2026-06-28vs McMaster/18/Div1/Tri-Lvl/RustonWon 20
W#2 DoublesTiphanie Maxwell / Donna Wilburn vs Shelby Daum / Whitney Doiron6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesCori Crittenden / Kelley Ivey vs Anna Garmon / Emily Tucker6-0, 6-0
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 standings3 teams · 3.5,3.0,2.5 Ruston (18&O) Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Sanderson/18/Div1/Tri-Lvl/Ruston40111250
2Johnson/18/Div1/Tri-Lvl/Ruston134817118
3McMaster/18/Div1/Tri-Lvl/Ruston133919122

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 2.81 estimated across 9 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.

3.12
Donna Wilburn
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.96
Sarah Keyes Jeffords
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.91
Tina Otwell
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.90
Taylor Weeks
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.80
Tiphanie Maxwell
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.78
Brandy Roberson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.77
Jennifer Sanderson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.60
Ashlea Price
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.46
Kelley Ivey
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Cori Crittenden
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
Regina McNeill
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
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.

Donna Wilburn
14W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%20%80%
3.12
Sarah Keyes Jeffords
12W–11L career · 1 line in 2026
60%40%<1%
2.96
Tina Otwell
16W–16L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
2.91
Taylor Weeks
12W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
77%23%<1%
2.90
Tiphanie Maxwell
17W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
2%91%8%
2.80
3
Brandy Roberson
9W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
2%92%6%
2.78
Jennifer Sanderson
32W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
3%92%5%
2.77
2.5
Ashlea Price
2W–4L career · 1 line in 2026
0%23%77%
2.60
Kelley Ivey
7W–11L career · 2 lines in 2026
62%38%<1%
2.46
2.5
Cori Crittenden
2W–0L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Regina McNeill
2W–3L career · 1 line in 2026
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.