Teams

Sa.Wood18A

2026 Capital Adult 18 & Over · 4.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.90 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2026-05-11vs Ti.Barrier18ALost 03
L#2 DoublesDaphne Poulk / Amber Cagle vs Julie Kelly / Kathryn Lawn4-6, 3-6
L#2 SinglesTatiana Nevmyrych vs Tiffany Barrier5-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesChristina Loaiza / Caroline Fungaroli vs Rachael Yelverton / Amanda Lindsay3-6, 6-7
2026-04-26vs Me.Golder18ALost 13
L#1 DoublesAmelia Blankenship / Christina Loaiza vs Meryl Golder / Courtney Whalen4-6, 3-6
W#1 SinglesCarolyn Lee vs Shannon Ervin6-0, 6-2
L#2 DoublesChunhui Higgins / Ruthann Gray vs Hannah Boghosian / Jenna Raynor1-6, 2-3
L#3 DoublesDeanna Lape / Tatiana Nevmyrych vs Amy Gillespie / Ashley Palmer1-6, 2-6
2026-04-19vs Pa.Hankerson18A4.0Won 31
W#1 DoublesCaroline Fungaroli / Christina Loaiza vs Ashley Weeks / Stacie White6-2, 6-3
L#1 SinglesButton Hall vs Paulina Powierza2-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesAmber Cagle / Daphne Poulk vs Amber Bowden / Ashlin Harper6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesDeanna Lape / Tatiana Nevmyrych vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2026-04-12vs Li.Kempf18ALost 14
L#1 DoublesAmelia Blankenship / Christina Loaiza vs Jane Hunter / Rachael Kiker3-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#1 SinglesCarolyn Lee vs Jennifer Ravenscraft4-6, 6-1, 0-1
W#2 DoublesAmber Cagle / Daphne Poulk vs Emily Johnson / Theresa Stone4-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 SinglesTatiana Nevmyrych vs Jessica Phillips2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesCaroline Fungaroli / Ruthann Gray vs Lisa Kempf / Emily Larson4-6, 7-6, 0-1
2026-04-05vs Ke.Green18AWon 41
W#1 DoublesXimena Ordonez-Acevedo / Chunhui Higgins vs Namita Lokare / Angela Teasdale6-0, 6-0
W#1 SinglesCarolyn Lee vs Amber Richardson6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesSandy Wood / Amber Cagle vs Nicole Peterson / Keshia Green6-3, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 SinglesTatiana Nevmyrych vs Keisha Demps2-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesDeanna Lape / Daphne Poulk vs Alyssa Evrard / Jaime Clark6-4, 6-1
2026-03-22vs Ja.Sprague18AWon 32
L#1 DoublesChristina Loaiza / Amelia Blankenship vs Camden Clark / Holly Moore3-6, 4-6
W#1 SinglesButton Hall vs Allie Greene2-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAmber Cagle / Caroline Fungaroli vs Christine Hughes / April Bazin6-7, 6-1, 1-0
L#2 SinglesTatiana Nevmyrych vs Amanda Campbell6-4, 2-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesSandy Wood / Ruthann Gray vs Elizabeth Carroll / Haleigh Broglin6-0, 7-6
2026-03-15vs Sa.Mazurak18ALost 14
W#1 DoublesXimena Ordonez-Acevedo / Sandy Wood vs Rose Whitehurst / Melissa House6-3, 1-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesButton Hall vs Kim Peters4-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesCaroline Fungaroli / Daphne Poulk vs Caroline Tanner / Ann Skvarcius5-7, 4-6
L#2 SinglesMichele Fitzsimons vs Laura Cox0-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesRuthann Gray / Deanna Lape vs Alison Kalinowski / Sara Mazurak3-6, 7-6, 0-1
2026-03-09vs Me.Everitt18A4.0Lost 23
L#1 DoublesAmelia Blankenship / Sandy Wood vs Erin McAllister / Deno Fonville2-6, 5-7
L#1 SinglesCarolyn Lee vs Megan Wu4-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesAmber Cagle / Daphne Poulk vs Anna Bentley / Kara Horton6-3, 6-3
L#2 SinglesMichele Fitzsimons vs Sapna Varkey0-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesChristina Loaiza / Button Hall vs Rebecca Reynolds / Katie Evans6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2026-03-08vs Er.Wynia18A4.0Lost 23
W#1 DoublesChunhui Higgins / Ximena Ordonez-Acevedo vs Jennifer Kuzma / Denise Decandia6-1, 6-1
L#1 SinglesTatiana Nevmyrych vs Molly Andrews4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesCarolyn Lee / Amber Cagle vs Cari DeCandia / Shannon Littleton3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 SinglesMichele Fitzsimons vs Elaine Hudson2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesButton Hall / Deanna Lape vs Valerie Wallace / Julie Dougherty3-6, 4-6
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 standings21 teams · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Me.Everitt18A4.081301536331
2Me.DeLorme18A82391124293
3Ad.Brewer18A82321844373
4Li.Kempf18A72351034347
5Ti.Barrier18A72271840380
6Me.Golder18A63291641386
7Ma.LaPlante18A64311945416
8Le.Ragsdale18A64282246390
9Ta.Borsuk18A64272351393
10Ka.Brinckerhoff18A64262455420
11Al.Crumpler18A64252555421
12Su.Fanelly18A55282250415
13Pa.Hankerson18A4.045202553387
14Er.Wynia18A4.045172857434
15Sa.Mazurak18A36182760443
16Sa.Wood18A36182761423
17Ja.Sprague18A27202558449
18Ki.Monsees18A4.028203063467
19Am.Bauer18A28104085544
20Ke.Green18A18113472478
21Me.George18A4.001084288574

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 3.61 estimated across 14 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.

3.99
Chunhui Higgins
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.88
Ximena Ordonez-Acevedo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.84
Carolyn Lee
usually #1 Singles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.76
Christina Loaiza
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.72
Amelia Blankenship
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Singles 20% · published 4
3.71
Amber Cagle
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.62
Caroline Fungaroli
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.60
Button Hall
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.59
Sandy Wood
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.51
Daphne Poulk
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.48
Tatiana Nevmyrych
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published
3.35
Ruthann Gray
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.33
Deanna Lape
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.19
Michele Fitzsimons
usually #2 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.

Amber Cagle + Daphne Poulk14359% games+10.7% vs expected
Chunhui Higgins + Ximena Ordonez-Acevedo9359% games+6.3% vs expected
Amber Cagle + Caroline Fungaroli6158% games+0.7% vs expected
Deanna Lape + Daphne Poulk10355% gamesnot enough data
Deanna Lape + Button Hall3255% gamesnot enough data
Sandy Wood + Amelia Blankenship224 matchesnot enough data
Christina Loaiza + Amelia Blankenship044 matchesnot enough data
Chunhui Higgins + Caroline Fungaroli123 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.

4
Chunhui Higgins
232W–92L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%54%46%
3.99
4
Ximena Ordonez-Acevedo
169W–79L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.88
4
Carolyn Lee
35W–16L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%89%10%
3.84
4
Christina Loaiza
8W–6L career · 6 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
3.76
4
Amelia Blankenship
7W–11L career · 5 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.72
4
Amber Cagle
216W–100L career · 7 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
3.71
4
Caroline Fungaroli
185W–70L career · 5 lines in 2026
17%82%<1%
3.62
4
Button Hall
223W–223L career · 5 lines in 2026
22%78%<1%
3.60
Sandy Wood
7W–5L career · 4 lines in 2026
25%75%<1%
3.59
3.5
Daphne Poulk
91W–58L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%47%53%
3.51
Tatiana Nevmyrych
2W–12L career · 6 lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
3.48
Ruthann Gray
9W–13L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%88%12%
3.35
3.5
Deanna Lape
142W–96L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%90%10%
3.33
Michele Fitzsimons
2W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
3.19

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.