Teams

Thaler 3.0 - Columbus - MTC

2025 Adult 18 & Over-EC · Women 3.0

12 players · average NTRP 2.88 / MISSISSIPPI

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 →
Schedule8 played
2025-04-28vs Brown 18+ 3.0-Columbus-MTCLost 23
W#1 DoublesHeather Clardy / Jean Hurst vs Renee Phillips / Emily Anne Callaway6-4, 6-4
W#1 SinglesMargo Allgood vs Chaney Fair6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesApril Barlow / Hillary Richardson vs Shelby Brown / McKenzie Thatcher1-6, 4-6
L#2 SinglesCathryn Borer vs Patti Stanley4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesGAYLA RYE / Allyson Jones vs Candice Maze / Jenna Hladik0-6, 6-7
2025-04-14vs Brown 18+ 3.0-Columbus-MTCWon 32
W#1 DoublesHeather Clardy / Savannah Thaler vs Candice Maze / Laura C Yeatman6-7, 6-3, 1-0
L#1 SinglesAbigail Parker vs Emily Anne Callaway1-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesApril Barlow / Allyson Jones vs Chaney Fair / Jordyn Gill6-0, 6-0
W#2 SinglesHillary Richardson vs Jenna Hladik6-3, 6-4
L#3 DoublesCathryn Borer / GAYLA RYE vs Patti Stanley / Sara Brown1-6, 0-6
2025-04-06vs Davis 18+ 3.0-STK-SHSWon 30
W#1 DoublesGAYLA RYE / Skyler Stapp vs Jennifer Cougle / Denise Peeples4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#1 SinglesHillary Richardson vs Natalie Jolly6-2, 7-5
W#2 SinglesHeather Clardy vs Delaney Wallace6-4, 6-4
2025-03-30vs Davis 18+ 3.0-STK-SHSSplit 22
L#1 DoublesGAYLA RYE / Hillary Richardson vs Delaney Wallace / Lauren Davis5-7, 0-6
W#1 SinglesMargo Allgood vs Natalie Jolly4-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSUSANNE CUNNINGHAM / Skyler Stapp vs Jennifer Cougle / Denise Peeples4-6, 2-6
W#2 SinglesCathryn Borer vs Jaime Bell6-2, 7-5
2025-03-27vs Brown 18+ 3.0-Columbus-MTCLost 03
L#1 DoublesSavannah Thaler / Heather Clardy vs McKenzie Thatcher / Emily Waters5-7, 4-6
L#1 SinglesAbigail Parker vs Shelby Brown0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesGAYLA RYE / Kathryn Phillips vs MARY GALJOUR / Chaney Fair2-6, 5-7
2025-03-24vs Brown 18+ 3.0-Columbus-MTCLost 23
L#1 DoublesJean Hurst / Margo Allgood vs Shelby Brown / McKenzie Thatcher1-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesHeather Clardy vs Jenna Hladik6-2, 6-0
L#2 DoublesApril Barlow / Allyson Jones vs Emily Waters / Emily Anne Callaway2-6, 3-6
W#2 SinglesHillary Richardson vs Candice Maze6-2, 6-0
L#3 DoublesKathryn Phillips / Cathryn Borer vs Renee Phillips / Laura C Yeatman2-6, 0-6
2025-03-02vs Davis 18+ 3.0-STK-SHSLost 03
L#1 DoublesMargo Allgood / Skyler Stapp vs Mary Robertson / Lauren Davis2-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#1 SinglesSavannah Thaler vs Natalie Jolly7-6, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesAbigail Parker vs Jaime Bell5-7, 6-7
2025-02-26vs Davis 18+ 3.0-STK-SHSSplit 22
W#1 DoublesMargo Allgood / Savannah Thaler vs Delaney Wallace / Lauren Davis6-3, 6-7, 1-0
L#1 SinglesAbigail Parker vs Natalie Jolly4-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesJean Hurst / GAYLA RYE vs Kristen Vance / Jennifer Cougle6-2, 6-4
L#3 DoublesSUSANNE CUNNINGHAM / Allyson Jones vs Denise Peeples / Ashley Thompson6-3, 3-6, 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 standings3 teams · Women 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Brown 18+ 3.0-Columbus-MTC71291123238
2Thaler 3.0 - Columbus - MTC44202044337
3Davis 18+ 3.0-STK-SHS17112963436

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 2.75 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.

2.88
Jean Hurst
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.82
Margo Allgood
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #1 Singles 40% · published
2.77
Cathryn Borer
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
Angela White
published 3
April Barlow
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.53
GAYLA RYE
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Abigail Parker
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 2.5
Heather Clardy
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Singles 20% · published
Hillary Richardson
usually #2 Singles 40%, also #1 Singles 20% · published
SUSANNE CUNNINGHAM
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Savannah Thaler
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
Skyler Stapp
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · 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.

Jean Hurst
13W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%80%20%
2.88
Margo Allgood
5W–3L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
2.82
3
Cathryn Borer
7W–10L career · 4 lines in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
3
Angela White
3W–6L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
3
April Barlow
5W–7L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
GAYLA RYE
13W–9L career · 6 lines in 2025
42%58%<1%
2.53
2.5
Abigail Parker
0W–4L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Heather Clardy
10W–2L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Hillary Richardson
7W–3L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
SUSANNE CUNNINGHAM
0W–7L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Savannah Thaler
4W–4L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Skyler Stapp
5W–10L career · 7 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.