Teams

MATA/Angie Barajas

2025 · 2026 MATA USTA Adult 18 & Over - Fall

8 players · average NTRP 2.83 / GEORGIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-10-14Won 10
W#1 DoublesLauren Mauldin / Ana Hernandez vs Margaret Cox / Alpa Patel6-4, 6-4
2025-10-07vs JDS-BENDALLWon 10
W#2 DoublesCaroline Waldrep / Neha Deopuria vs Alpa Patel / Laura Wyche6-4, 6-0
2025-09-30vs JDS-BENDALLLost 01
L#2 DoublesWendi Peacock / Lauren Mauldin vs Margaret Cox / Maria Hart1-5
2025-09-16vs JDS-BENDALLWon 10
W#2 DoublesAngie Barajas / Neha Deopuria vs Alpa Patel / Sydney Lewis6-2, 6-1
2025-09-09vs JDS-BENDALLWon 10
W#2 DoublesWendi Peacock / Lauren Mauldin vs Alpa Patel / Laura Wyche6-7, 6-3, 1-0
2025-09-02Won 10
W#2 DoublesWendy Way / Neha Deopuria vs Margaret Cox / Bonnie Cornelius6-1, 6-3
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 standings2 teams · 2026 MATA USTA Adult 18 & Over - Fall
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MATA/Angie Barajas70192578
2JDS-BENDALL0721939238

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 2.56 estimated across 7 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.

3.37
Wendy Way
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 28% · published
2.86
Angie Barajas
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published 3
2.65
Valerie Reynolds
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #1 Singles 23% · published
2.65
Gracie Preston Rigby
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.19
Caroline Waldrep
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 2.5
2.16
Wendi Peacock
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
2.04
Lauren Mauldin
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Neha Deopuria
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Wendi Peacock + Angie Barajas314 matchesnot enough data
Gracie Preston Rigby + Wendy Way213 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.

Wendy Way
29W–12L career · 18 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.37
3
Angie Barajas
42W–27L career · 10 lines in 2026
<1%86%14%
2.86
Valerie Reynolds
29W–29L career · 13 lines in 2026
12%87%<1%
2.65
3
Gracie Preston Rigby
29W–24L career · 12 lines in 2026
13%87%<1%
2.65
2.5
Caroline Waldrep
19W–22L career · 7 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.19
Wendi Peacock
8W–16L career · 7 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.16
Lauren Mauldin
3W–8L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.04
Neha Deopuria
13W–3L career · 3 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.