Teams

MLong-DUR

2026 Eno River Singles 18 & Over · 18 & Over Singles 4.0 Women Evening

9 players · average NTRP 3.83 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-06-29vs HRoss-DURLost 02
L#1 SinglesMadison Collier vs Justyne Ross6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesRebecca O'Brien vs Carolyn Lee2-6, 1-6
2026-06-22vs KPollak-DURSplit 11
L#1 SinglesTerri Tarrant vs Kathryn Pollak1-6, 3-4
W#2 SinglesJill Akiyama vs Ana Goodwin3-6, 6-0, 1-0
2026-06-15vs KGreen-DURWon 30
W#1 SinglesJill Akiyama vs Elizabeth Chan6-4, 6-3
W#2 SinglesDallas Knight vs Amber Bowden6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 SinglesMadison Collier vs Laura Carlson1-6, 6-2, 1-0
2026-06-08vs HRoss-DURLost 12
L#1 SinglesKatya Lundberg vs Chace Ogle3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 SinglesRebecca O'Brien vs Valerie Acre2-6, 0-6
W#3 SinglesLina Habib vs Maya Hahn6-2, 4-6, 1-0
2026-06-01vs KPollak-DURWon 21
W#1 SinglesJill Akiyama vs Amber Cagle6-2, 6-4
L#2 SinglesEsmeralda Contreras vs Hannah Silverstein0-6, 0-6
W#3 SinglesKatya Lundberg vs Anna Brown7-5, 6-2
2026-05-18vs KGreen-DURWon 21
W#1 SinglesDallas Knight vs Amber Bowden6-0, 6-2
W#2 SinglesLina Habib vs Jennifer Kuzma6-4, 7-5
L#3 SinglesRebecca O'Brien vs Laura Carlson6-7, 2-6
2026-05-11vs HRoss-DURLost 12
L#1 SinglesMadison Collier vs Valerie Acre1-6, 0-6
L#2 SinglesLina Habib vs Sindhu Shivaji6-7, 1-6
W#3 SinglesKatya Lundberg vs Carolyn Lee6-3, 7-6
2026-05-04vs KPollak-DURWon 21
L#1 SinglesKatya Lundberg vs Amber Cagle3-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#2 SinglesLina Habib vs Hannah Silverstein6-4, 6-3
W#3 SinglesDallas Knight vs Kathryn Pollak6-3, 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 standings for 18 & Over Singles 4.0 Women Evening 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 3.47 estimated across 8 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.

3.80
Lina Habib
usually #2 Singles 86%, also #3 Singles 14% · published 4
3.76
Katya Lundberg
usually #1 Singles 43%, also #3 Singles 43% · published
3.67
Jill Akiyama
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
3.56
Dallas Knight
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 17% · published 3.5
3.50
Terri Tarrant
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.41
Madison Collier
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #2 Singles 29% · published
3.23
Rebecca O'Brien
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published
2.78
Mary T Long
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
Esmeralda Contreras
usually #2 Singles 100% · 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.

4
Lina Habib
38W–41L career · 7 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.80
Katya Lundberg
5W–8L career · 7 lines in 2026
3%92%4%
3.76
Jill Akiyama
7W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.67
3.5
Dallas Knight
28W–29L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%32%68%
3.56
4
Terri Tarrant
8W–34L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
51%49%<1%
3.50
Madison Collier
13W–11L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
3.41
Rebecca O'Brien
16W–18L career · 3 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.23
Mary T Long
27W–68L career · 1 line in 2026
2%92%6%
2.78
Esmeralda Contreras
0W–1L career · 1 line 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.