Teams

Neal/Rogers/SVCC

2024 Adult Singles 18 & Over · 3.0 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-09-21Won 10
W#3 DoublesTiffany Harris / Laurie Letts vs Cynthia Meullenet / Cindy Flores6-3, 6-1
2025-01-26vs Sahu/Springdale/SRCWon 30
W#1 SinglesPiper Anderson vs Jamie Killingsworth6-0, 6-2
W#2 SinglesGabriela Bottger vs Tia Greaser6-1, 6-1
W#3 SinglesLaurie Letts vs Victoria Gammill4-6, 6-2, 1-0
2025-01-05vs Gunther/Fayetteville/FACWon 30
W#1 SinglesGabriela Bottger vs Brittany Adair6-0, 6-2
W#2 SinglesPiper Anderson vs Cezanne Garlinghouse6-0, 6-0
W#3 SinglesJulie Ralston vs Amanda Gunther6-1, 6-1
2024-12-14vs Sahu/Springdale/SRCWon 21
W#1 SinglesPiper Anderson vs Tia Greaser6-0, 6-1
W#2 SinglesLaurie Letts vs Megan Sahu6-3, 7-6
L#3 SinglesMelanie Neal vs Victoria Gammill4-6, 6-1, 0-1
2024-12-02vs Gunther/Fayetteville/FACWon 30
W#1 SinglesGabriela Bottger vs Carolina Gomez6-1, 6-3
W#2 SinglesJackie Vermillion vs Brittany Adair6-3, 7-5
W#3 SinglesKara Briggs vs Lauren McClure6-3, 6-4
2024-11-18vs Gagliardo/Rogers/SVCCLost 12
W#1 SinglesMelanie Neal vs Amy Colucci6-4, 6-3
L#2 SinglesJackie Vermillion vs Samantha Gagliardo2-6, 3-6
L#3 SinglesJulie Ralston vs Cally Turner0-6, 2-6
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 3.0 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 3.13 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.

3.45
Piper Anderson
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
3.37
Gabriela Bottger
usually #3 Singles 40%, also #1 Singles 40% · published
3.32
Laurie Letts
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 33% · published
3.28
Melanie Neal
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published
3.01
Kara Briggs
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
2.98
Julie Ralston
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
2.81
Jackie Vermillion
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
2.79
Carolina Mejia
published 3
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.

Gabriela Bottger + Piper Anderson8358% games+5.0% vs expected
Melanie Neal + Laurie Letts3256% gamesnot 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.

Piper Anderson
27W–12L career · 6 lines in 2024
<1%64%36%
3.45
Gabriela Bottger
21W–12L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%83%17%
3.37
Laurie Letts
35W–25L career · 6 lines in 2024
1%89%10%
3.32
Melanie Neal
31W–18L career · 2 lines in 2024
2%92%6%
3.28
Kara Briggs
7W–7L career · 1 line in 2024
47%53%<1%
3.01
Julie Ralston
4W–14L career · 2 lines in 2024
56%44%<1%
2.98
Jackie Vermillion
7W–5L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%90%8%
2.81
3
Carolina Mejia
14W–22L career · no lines in 2024
2%91%7%
2.79

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.