Teams

CTL18/Strong/CTFC

CTL Tri Level · Women's 3.5, 3.0, 2.5 Weekend

26 players · average NTRP 2.90 / SOUTH CAROLINA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-06-08vs CTL18/Hess/WWDWon 30
W#1 DoublesMegan McCollum / Ruth Horger vs Anny Zalesne / Janet Krupa6-2, 7-6
W#2 DoublesLeigh Cason / Susan Porter vs Kate Grabowski / Nikia Bristow6-1, 6-0
W#3 DoublesCharity Ard / Heyward Bonyata vs Latha Ganesh Babu / Heather Bonilha6-2, 6-1
2025-06-01vs CTL18/Frame/WWDLost 02
L#1 DoublesAnna Saunders / Lynae Beresford vs Haleigh Boynton / Stephanie Hartzog4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesReilly Browning / Allie Lehr vs Elizabeth Reardon / Suzanne Frame2-6, 0-6
2025-05-04vs CTL18/Hess/WWDWon 21
W#1 DoublesRuth Horger / Lauren Asbill vs Wyndi Green / Anny Zalesne6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesKristin Plyler / Shaun Rooney vs Stephanie Johnson / Shirley Schoonover6-7, 6-3, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKim Andrews / Georgia Carfley vs Beth Amodio / Meghan Wood6-0, 7-5
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 standings for Women's 3.5, 3.0, 2.5 Weekend 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 2.80 estimated across 21 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.

3.36
Rebecca Gillespie
published
3.29
Leigh Cason
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.21
Ruth Horger
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.21
Shaun Rooney
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.18
Anna Saunders
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.17
Megan McCollum
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.10
Diana Joyner
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.08
Stacy Strong
published
2.98
Jennifer Asbill
published
2.87
Kristin Plyler
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.77
Allie Lehr
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.71
Lynae Beresford
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.65
Kennah Brearley
published
2.64
Leslie McKenzie
published
2.48
Charity Ard
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.48
Cheri Taylor
published 2.5
2.45
Reilly Browning
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.42
Heyward Bonyata
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.35
Kim Andrews
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.21
Joni Richardson
published
2.09
Georgia Carfley
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Erin Causey
published
Lauren Asbill
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Susan Porter
published
Suzanne Gowan
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.

Stacy Strong + Leigh Cason8165% games+11.3% vs expected
Rebecca Gillespie + Leigh Cason6163% games+11.1% vs expected
Kristin Plyler + Charity Ard3353% games+9.6% vs expected
Jennifer Asbill + Diana Joyner5165% games+9.4% vs expected
Ruth Horger + Megan McCollum5163% games+7.2% vs expected
Diana Joyner + Megan McCollum4257% games+6.6% vs expected
Diana Joyner + Kristin Plyler7358% games+3.9% vs expected
Stacy Strong + Rebecca Gillespie7554% games+2.9% 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.

Rebecca Gillespie
69W–26L career · no lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.36
Leigh Cason
62W–28L career · 1 line in 2025
2%91%7%
3.29
Ruth Horger
104W–66L career · 4 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.21
Shaun Rooney
41W–16L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%7%93%
3.21
3.5
Anna Saunders
10W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
10%89%1%
3.18
Megan McCollum
71W–47L career · 1 line in 2025
11%88%1%
3.17
3
Diana Joyner
100W–49L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%23%77%
3.10
Stacy Strong
85W–45L career · no lines in 2025
<1%28%72%
3.08
Jennifer Asbill
75W–36L career · no lines in 2025
<1%56%43%
2.98
Kristin Plyler
80W–52L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%82%18%
2.87
3
Allie Lehr
33W–38L career · 1 line in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
Lynae Beresford
14W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
6%92%2%
2.71
Kennah Brearley
23W–12L career · no lines in 2025
13%86%1%
2.65
Leslie McKenzie
21W–12L career · no lines in 2025
0%17%83%
2.64
2.5
Charity Ard
29W–24L career · 1 line in 2025
0%56%44%
2.48
2.5
Cheri Taylor
29W–29L career · no lines in 2025
0%57%43%
2.48
Reilly Browning
16W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
0%64%36%
2.45
Heyward Bonyata
19W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
0%73%27%
2.42
Kim Andrews
22W–27L career · 1 line in 2025
0%86%14%
2.35
Joni Richardson
12W–40L career · no lines in 2025
0%98%2%
2.21
Georgia Carfley
9W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.09
Erin Causey
6W–11L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Lauren Asbill
3W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Nancy Margaret Harkins
20W–23L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Susan Porter
54W–12L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Suzanne Gowan
12W–15L career · no lines in 2025
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.