Teams

Wagon Wheel/Coffindaffer W4.0F

2026 DALLAS TENNIS N · A 18 & Over ADULT Fall W. Friday

25 players · average NTRP 4.00 / TEXAS

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-10-17Won 10
W#3 DoublesAmy Dabbous / Jamie McCrary vs Duygu Uzun / Cristin Pike7-5, 6-4
2025-10-10vs Chandlers Landing/Owenby W4.0FWon 10
W#2 DoublesJennifer Lee / Daisha Moore vs Amanda Hurst / Suzi Donaghe6-4, 6-1
2025-09-12vs Jack Coleman/Smith-Bradley W4.0FWon 10
W#2 DoublesAmy Dabbous / Jamie McCrary vs Michelle Hefner / Kristl Pearl3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2025-09-05vs DCC/Chilian W4.0FLost 01
L#1 DoublesDaniella Bowling / Daisha Moore vs Brandi Chilian / Bridget Goldman4-6, 6-4, 0-1
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 A 18 & Over ADULT Fall W. Friday 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 3.80 estimated across 24 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.

4.22
Charlotte Barnett
usually #1 Singles 44%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.10
Eugenia Viejobueno
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
4.09
Shana Lazarine
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
4.04
Natalie Timothy
usually #1 Singles 58%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.98
Marnie Pizzitola
published
3.96
Edith Kruckmann
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.91
Thea Junt
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.88
Daniella Bowling
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.86
Amy Koonsman
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.84
Kelda Rusher
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.84
Daisha Moore
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.82
Christina Perron
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.78
Winnie Stimmel
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.76
April Murphy
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.75
Jamie McCrary
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.72
3.71
Amy Dabbous
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.64
Trish Chandler
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.63
Melissa Reilly
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.61
Caryn Angus
published 4
3.60
Suzanne Ortolano
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.52
Jo Ann Compton
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.52
Cynthia Cordial
published 3.5
3.52
Rita Hudson
published
Sophia Coll
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #1 Singles 29% · published
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.

Daniella Bowling + Eugenia Viejobueno7074% games+16.8% vs expected
Marnie Pizzitola + Edith Kruckmann14469% games+6.3% vs expected
Caryn Angus + Christina Perron6165% games+5.6% vs expected
Amy Dabbous + Jamie McCrary5160% games+3.3% vs expected
Thea Junt + Jamie McCrary3350% games+3.2% vs expected
Marnie Pizzitola + Melissa Reilly9062% games−0.1% vs expected
Thea Junt + Kelda Rusher17461% games−0.6% vs expected
Christina Perron + Eugenia Viejobueno5357% games−0.8% vs expected
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.

4.5
Charlotte Barnett
8W–1L career · 9 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
4.22
4
Eugenia Viejobueno
52W–17L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%22%78%
4.10
Shana Lazarine
26W–13L career · 5 lines in 2026
25%75%<1%
4.09
Natalie Timothy
48W–43L career · 12 lines in 2026
<1%38%62%
4.04
Marnie Pizzitola
72W–24L career · no lines in 2026
<1%56%44%
3.98
4
Edith Kruckmann
53W–14L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%62%38%
3.96
Thea Junt
53W–21L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%75%25%
3.91
4
Daniella Bowling
11W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.88
4
Amy Koonsman
24W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%85%15%
3.86
Kelda Rusher
59W–30L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%88%11%
3.84
4
Daisha Moore
8W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%89%11%
3.84
4
Christina Perron
24W–20L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%91%9%
3.82
Winnie Stimmel
42W–31L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.78
4
April Murphy
9W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%95%3%
3.76
4
Jamie McCrary
13W–16L career · 4 lines in 2026
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Jennifer Coffindaffer
127W–78L career · no lines in 2026
5%94%2%
3.72
4
Amy Dabbous
18W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
5%93%1%
3.71
Trish Chandler
14W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
14%86%<1%
3.64
Melissa Reilly
32W–7L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%16%84%
3.63
4
Caryn Angus
13W–12L career · no lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.61
Suzanne Ortolano
11W–21L career · 3 lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.60
Jo Ann Compton
16W–28L career · 3 lines in 2026
43%57%<1%
3.52
3.5
Cynthia Cordial
14W–17L career · no lines in 2026
<1%45%55%
3.52
Rita Hudson
4W–11L career · no lines in 2026
45%55%<1%
3.52
Sophia Coll
12W–2L career · 7 lines 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.