Teams

Kibler/JB/RPCC

2024 Singles 18 & Over · 2.5 Women

8 players · average NTRP 2.88 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2024-11-21vs Lance/JB/JCCLost 03
L#1 SinglesBrittany McFadden vs Elizabeth Cox6-7, 3-6
L#2 SinglesJamie Chandler vs Callie Kellums1-6, 1-6
L#3 SinglesAbby Husband vs Casey Schatzley0-6, 0-6
2024-11-17vs Lance/JB/JCCLost 12
L#1 SinglesMaggie Barnes vs Casey Schatzley3-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesJamie Chandler vs Elizabeth Cox1-6, 1-6
W#3 SinglesBrittany McFadden vs Paige Cox2-6, 6-4, 1-0
2024-11-14vs Noto/JB/JCCWon 20
W#1 SinglesBrittany McFadden vs Samantha McFadden7-5, 7-5
W#2 SinglesAshley Christian vs Veronica Trimarchi6-0, 6-0
2024-10-29vs Chambers/JB/APCCWon 20
W#1 SinglesJessica Greene vs Alyssa Ishmael6-4, 6-4
W#2 SinglesAshley Christian vs Audra McClung6-2, 6-2
2024-10-22vs Noto/JB/JCCWon 21
W#1 SinglesMallory Kibler vs Michelle Myers6-0, 6-3
W#2 SinglesJamie Chandler vs Bethany Noto6-0, 6-0
L#3 SinglesBobbi Hydrick vs Kelli Adkins6-2, 1-6, 1-0
2024-10-15vs Chambers/JB/APCCWon 30
W#1 SinglesMaggie Barnes vs Arielle Nast6-0, 6-2
W#2 SinglesJamie Chandler vs Lydia Thornton6-3, 6-3
W#3 SinglesBobbi Hydrick vs Hannah Chambers4-6, 6-3, 1-0
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 standings for 2.5 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 2.62 estimated across 6 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.

2.92
Maggie Barnes
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #3 Singles 25% · published
2.75
Jamie Chandler
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
2.69
Mallory Kibler
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.59
Brittany McFadden
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 3
2.40
Bobbi Hydrick
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.38
Ashley Christian
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 2.5
Abby Husband
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
Jessica Greene
usually #1 Singles 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.

Brittany McFadden + Jamie Chandler123 matchesnot enough data
Jamie Chandler + Mallory Kibler303 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.

Maggie Barnes
16W–14L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%72%28%
2.92
3
Jamie Chandler
41W–16L career · 4 lines in 2024
3%95%2%
2.75
Mallory Kibler
13W–5L career · 1 line in 2024
7%92%1%
2.69
3
Brittany McFadden
15W–9L career · 3 lines in 2024
24%75%<1%
2.59
3
Bobbi Hydrick
18W–19L career · 2 lines in 2024
79%21%<1%
2.40
2.5
Ashley Christian
12W–2L career · 2 lines in 2024
0%82%18%
2.38
Abby Husband
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Jessica Greene
1W–0L career · 1 line in 2024
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.