Teams

Hanly

2026 South East Tennis Singles 18 & Over League · 3.5 Women 18 & Over

7 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-02-28vs Capobianco CFCCSplit 11
W#1 SinglesJulia Mattingly vs Madeleine Clark4-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 SinglesMolly Hanly vs Stephanie Gould6-4, 5-7, 0-1
2026-02-23vs Dameron 18+Won 21
W#1 SinglesMaddie Crumpton vs Evelyn Foster6-1, 6-1
W#2 SinglesBrittany Savoca vs Patricia Furbay6-1, 6-1
L#3 SinglesMolly Hanly vs Lakitha Smith4-6, 4-6
2026-02-20vs Capobianco CFCCWon 21
W#1 SinglesJulia Mattingly vs Sarah Beth Deans6-4, 6-2
W#2 SinglesMeghan McKeithan vs Kelly Capobianco6-4, 6-3
L#3 SinglesMolly Hanly vs Sarah McLamb5-7, 2-6
2026-02-18vs Seidel/NerellLost 12
W#1 SinglesMaddie Crumpton vs Corinne Monahan6-1, 6-3
L#2 SinglesBrittany Savoca vs Madison Seidel2-6, 3-6
L#3 SinglesMolly Hanly vs Brie Pettid1-6, 0-6
2026-02-16vs Dameron 18+Won 21
L#1 SinglesBrittany Savoca vs Holly Dameron4-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#2 SinglesMaddie Crumpton vs Kris Foster6-2, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 SinglesMeghan McKeithan vs Patricia Furbay6-4, 7-6
2026-01-21vs Seidel/NerellLost 12
W#1 SinglesMaddie Crumpton vs Kelly Nerell7-6, 6-2
L#2 SinglesMolly Hanly vs Madison Seidel0-6, 3-6
L#3 SinglesMeghan McKeithan vs Brie Pettid0-6, 1-6
2026-01-12vs GainerLost 03
L#1 SinglesJulia Mattingly vs Catherine Strickland6-7, 3-6
L#2 SinglesMolly Hanly vs Andrea Talley3-6, 1-6
L#3 SinglesHeather Weddle vs Frances Kelly0-5
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 standings4 teams · 3.5 Women 18 & Over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Seidel/Nerell7119513155
2Capobianco CFCC44101432243
3Hanly3491226203
4Dameron 18+1771736253

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 3.31 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.

3.58
Maddie Crumpton
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
3.48
Julia Mattingly
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.48
Brittany Savoca
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.33
Mollie McKay
published
3.15
Heather Weddle
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
3.12
Meghan McKeithan
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
3.02
Molly Hanly
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · 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.

Heather Weddle + Julia Mattingly3357% games+5.4% 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.

Maddie Crumpton
28W–11L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%28%72%
3.58
Julia Mattingly
57W–35L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%54%46%
3.48
3.5
Brittany Savoca
24W–14L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%55%45%
3.48
Mollie McKay
13W–11L career · no lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.33
Heather Weddle
30W–26L career · 1 line in 2026
15%85%1%
3.15
Meghan McKeithan
17W–18L career · 3 lines in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.12
Molly Hanly
17W–25L career · 6 lines in 2026
43%57%<1%
3.02

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.