Teams

Sawyer NE 2.5

2025 Team Singles Tournament-NE · 2.5 Women

6 players · average NTRP 2.90 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-03-01vs Reynolds NE 2.5WWon 30
W#1 SinglesElizabeth Barnitz vs Susie Miley6-2, 6-0
W#2 SinglesAlicia Milstead vs Samantha Weatherford6-3, 6-3
W#3 SinglesAnn Hazel vs Corrie Weatherford6-4, 6-1
2025-03-01vs Snowden MarshallLost 03
L#1 SinglesPerrish Dragovits vs Shea Young6-4, 0-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesAshton Scarborough vs Maggie Neal3-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#3 SinglesAjah Sawyer vs Tammy Marshall3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2025-02-28vs Fulghum NE 2.5WLost 12
W#1 SinglesElizabeth Barnitz vs Megan McCarty6-3, 6-1
L#2 SinglesAnn Hazel vs Tara Williams1-6, 0-6
L#3 SinglesAjah Sawyer vs Keli Ballard3-6, 3-6
2025-02-28vs Downs NC 2.5WWon 30
W#1 SinglesElizabeth Barnitz vs Candace Kautzky6-2, 7-5
W#2 SinglesAshton Scarborough vs Pam Johnson6-3, 6-3
W#3 SinglesPerrish Dragovits vs Terra Bowling6-1, 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 standings5 teams · 2.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Snowden Marshall40102991
2Sawyer NE 2.522751084
3Fulghum NE 2.5W226613101
4Downs NC 2.5W225716129
5Reynolds NE 2.5W0421021136

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 2.78 estimated across 4 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.

2.99
Ashton Scarborough
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
2.94
Elizabeth Barnitz
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
Ann Hazel
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
2.62
Perrish Dragovits
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published
2.58
Alicia Milstead
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
Ajah Sawyer
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 2.5
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.

Alicia Milstead + Perrish Dragovits2347% games+0.9% vs expected
Ajah Sawyer + Ashton Scarborough314 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
Ashton Scarborough
62W–24L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%52%48%
2.99
3
Elizabeth Barnitz
43W–16L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%69%31%
2.94
3
Ann Hazel
7W–16L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Perrish Dragovits
18W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
17%82%<1%
2.62
3
Alicia Milstead
34W–38L career · 1 line in 2025
26%74%<1%
2.58
2.5
Ajah Sawyer
19W–26L career · 2 lines in 2025
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.