Teams

Inboden/JB/JCC

2026 Adult 18 & Over Spring 2 League · 4.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 4.00 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-04-21vs Cissell/JB/RPCCLost 23
L#1 DoublesLori Tyson / Margo Hafner vs Mollie Vance / Cortni Thomas3-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesHannah Fulmer vs Madison Matthews6-0, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesLINDSAY TROTTER / Abby Rogers vs Cherry Dallas / Ashlee Gill7-6, 6-2
L#2 SinglesMaddie Booth vs Haley Davis0-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesTabitha Inboden / Sarah Abbott vs Abigail Cissell / Shelley Cissell1-6, 2-6
2026-04-13vs Cissell/JB/RPCCWon 40
W#1 DoublesMindy Lancaster / Margo Hafner vs Bella Seeman / Andrea Seeman7-5, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMaggie Playter / Sarah Abbott vs Shelley Cissell / Cherry Dallas6-4, 6-3
W#2 SinglesTabitha Inboden vs Peyton Mullins6-4, 6-1
W#3 DoublesHailey Mitchener / Jenny Baggs vs Mollie Vance / Stephanie Romero3-6, 6-1, 1-0
2026-04-06vs Cissell/JB/RPCCLost 12
L#1 DoublesMegan Ragsdale / Shannon Crocker vs Shelley Cissell / Abigail Cissell4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesHannah Fulmer / Maddie Booth vs Mollie Vance / Haley Davis6-0, 6-3
L#2 SinglesJenny Baggs vs Cortni Thomas3-6, 1-6
2026-03-17vs Cissell/JB/RPCCLost 23
W#1 DoublesTabitha Inboden / Lori Tyson vs Madison Matthews / Mollie Vance5-7, 6-2, 1-0
L#1 SinglesLINDSAY TROTTER vs Cortni Thomas0-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesHailey Mitchener / Margo Hafner vs Shelley Cissell / Abigail Cissell6-4, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesMaggie Playter vs Bella Seeman1-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesAbby Rogers / Hannah Fulmer vs Cherry Dallas / Ashlee Gill6-3, 6-3
2026-03-08vs Cissell/JB/RPCCLost 23
L#1 DoublesMargo Hafner / Hailey Mitchener vs Abigail Cissell / Shelley Cissell4-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesMaggie Playter vs Bella Seeman4-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesLori Tyson / Tabitha Inboden vs Kaylee Berry / Stephanie Romero3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 SinglesHeather Eggers vs Cortni Thomas0-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesMegan Ragsdale / Hannah Fulmer vs Peyton Mullins / Mandy Folden6-1, 6-2
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 · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Cissell/JB/RPCC41141123196
2Inboden/JB/JCC14111433244

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 3.56 estimated across 13 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.

3.73
Margo Hafner
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.71
Maggie Playter
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
3.69
Hailey Mitchener
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.68
Hannah Fulmer
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.66
Maddie Booth
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
3.58
Megan Ragsdale
usually #1 Doubles 29%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.55
Abby Rogers
usually #4 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 20% · published 4
3.55
Tabitha Inboden
usually #2 Singles 25%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.55
Lori Tyson
usually #2 Doubles 36%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published
3.53
LINDSAY TROTTER
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.50
Heather Eggers
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
3.31
Mindy Lancaster
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.26
Sarah Abbott
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published
Jenny Baggs
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · 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.

Lori Tyson + Sarah Abbott1543% games+5.5% vs expected
Hannah Fulmer + Maddie Booth4352% games+1.5% vs expected
Hailey Mitchener + Heather Eggers224 matchesnot enough data
Lori Tyson + Margo Hafner224 matchesnot enough data
Abby Rogers + Sarah Abbott404 matchesnot enough data
Hailey Mitchener + Jenny Baggs303 matchesnot enough data
Hailey Mitchener + Tabitha Inboden123 matchesnot enough data
Hannah Fulmer + LINDSAY TROTTER123 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.

Margo Hafner
17W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.73
Maggie Playter
10W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.71
Hailey Mitchener
8W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.69
Hannah Fulmer
9W–12L career · 4 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.68
Maddie Booth
6W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
13%86%1%
3.66
Megan Ragsdale
15W–9L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%29%71%
3.58
4
Abby Rogers
29W–6L career · 5 lines in 2026
35%65%<1%
3.55
Tabitha Inboden
9W–9L career · 4 lines in 2026
36%64%<1%
3.55
Lori Tyson
18W–12L career · 11 lines in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.55
LINDSAY TROTTER
6W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
41%59%<1%
3.53
Heather Eggers
6W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
50%50%<1%
3.50
Mindy Lancaster
14W–3L career · 1 line in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
Sarah Abbott
21W–11L career · 9 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
3.26
Jenny Baggs
6W–1L career · 2 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.