Teams

Bright

2024 San Angelo Tri-Level League · Tri-level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.75 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2024-10-14vs WellsLost 12
L#1 DoublesKayla Hubble / Gentry Fields vs Betsy Wells / Shanna Johnson6-2, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesCody Burns / Nicole McDuffie vs Cindy Byrd / Susan Looka6-4, 1-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesAlicia Cole / Troi Middleton vs Kelcey Wells / Sylvia Guadarrama2-6, 4-6
2024-10-07vs StewartLost 03
L#1 DoublesKayla Hubble / Gentry Fields vs Shona Ramos / Kymberli Harper4-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesKelly Hallmark / Cody Burns vs Lexanne Edmiston / Jessica Theimer3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesHaley Losoya / Liz Albert vs Alison Dalby / Rebecca Dean4-6, 2-6
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 standings for Tri-level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 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 3.45 estimated across 10 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.

3.78
Allison Bright
published 4
3.78
Gentry Fields
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.78
Kayla Hubble
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.63
Stacy Duffell
published
3.55
Cody Burns
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.45
Kelly Hallmark
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.41
Lara Coleman
published
3.20
Nicole McDuffie
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.02
Liz Albert
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.89
Troi Middleton
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Haley Losoya
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Julia Schwartz
published
Kendal Jastrow
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.

Gentry Fields + Kayla Hubble191059% games+1.2% vs expected
Allison Bright + Stacy Duffell171255% games−2.8% vs expected
Allison Bright + Lara Coleman21043% games−5.5% vs expected
Lara Coleman + Cody Burns6163% gamesnot enough data
Kelly Hallmark + Stacy Duffell5156% gamesnot enough data
Julia Schwartz + Cody Burns2348% gamesnot enough data
Lara Coleman + Kelly Hallmark134 matchesnot enough data
Lara Coleman + Gentry Fields134 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
Allison Bright
36W–35L career · no lines in 2024
2%92%6%
3.78
Gentry Fields
32W–17L career · 2 lines in 2024
2%92%5%
3.78
Kayla Hubble
41W–22L career · 2 lines in 2024
2%92%5%
3.78
Stacy Duffell
49W–36L career · no lines in 2024
17%82%<1%
3.63
3.5
Cody Burns
55W–30L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%37%63%
3.55
Kelly Hallmark
70W–51L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%64%36%
3.45
Lara Coleman
44W–36L career · no lines in 2024
<1%74%26%
3.41
Nicole McDuffie
41W–44L career · 1 line in 2024
8%91%2%
3.20
Liz Albert
9W–8L career · 1 line in 2024
46%54%<1%
3.02
Troi Middleton
75W–69L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%78%22%
2.89
Haley Losoya
2W–8L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Julia Schwartz
21W–13L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Kendal Jastrow
3W–7L career · no lines 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.