Teams

Sa.Highsmith18S

2024 Capital Singles 18 & Over · 2.5 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2024-07-27vs De.Farmer18S2.5Won 20
W#1 SinglesSally Highsmith vs Kaitlin Tucker6-0, 6-0
W#2 SinglesGail Scoggin vs Katherine Clarida6-0, 6-2
2024-07-15vs Ta.Anthony18SWon 10
W#2 SinglesAnna Goodmon vs Maria Burton7-6, 7-5
2024-07-08vs La.Yopp18SSplit 11
L#1 SinglesSally Highsmith vs Beth Pegram6-2, 6-7, 0-1
W#2 SinglesKristen Patch vs Monika Garrell6-3, 6-3
2024-06-24Won 20
W#1 SinglesSally Highsmith vs Molly Lewis6-0, 6-0
W#3 SinglesAnna Goodmon vs Kathryn Whatley7-5, 6-4
2024-06-17vs As.Grantham18SWon 20
W#1 SinglesSally Highsmith vs Vickie Gibbs6-1, 6-1
W#2 SinglesKristen Patch vs Ashley Grantham6-2, 5-7, 1-0
2024-06-10vs St.Fogarty18S2.5Won 20
W#1 SinglesSally Highsmith vs Cheri Kivisto6-2, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesGail Scoggin vs Kim Manning6-4, 7-6
2024-06-03vs Te.Canterbury18SWon 21
L#1 SinglesAnna Goodmon vs Lauren Gray5-7, 3-6
W#2 SinglesSally Highsmith vs Melissa Rini6-0, 6-0
W#3 SinglesKristen Patch vs Teran Canterbury6-0, 3-6, 1-0
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 2.5 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 2.68 estimated across 7 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.

3.41
Sally Highsmith
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #2 Singles 30% · published 3.5
3.00
Sarah Newton
published
2.98
Anna Goodmon
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 3
2.75
Kristen Patch
usually #3 Singles 40%, also #2 Singles 40% · published 3
2.29
Gail Scoggin
usually #3 Singles 60%, also #2 Singles 40% · published 2.5
2.18
Sarah Sims Chesson
published
2.18
Stephanie Sneeden
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.

Kristen Patch + Sally Highsmith27567% games+6.7% vs expected
Kristen Patch + Anna Goodmon6355% games+2.9% vs expected
Gail Scoggin + Kristen Patch224 matchesnot enough data
Gail Scoggin + Sally Highsmith404 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.

3.5
Sally Highsmith
159W–46L career · 10 lines in 2024
<1%74%25%
3.41
Sarah Newton
18W–6L career · no lines in 2024
<1%50%50%
3.00
3
Anna Goodmon
76W–41L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%56%44%
2.98
3
Christina LeLiever
1W–2L career · type S · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Kristen Patch
80W–63L career · 5 lines in 2024
4%93%3%
2.75
2.5
Gail Scoggin
63W–102L career · 5 lines in 2024
0%93%7%
2.29
Sarah Sims Chesson
6W–9L career · no lines in 2024
0%99%1%
2.18
Stephanie Sneeden
2W–2L career · no lines in 2024
0%99%1%
2.18

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.