Teams

Pell City women's 6.5 combo

2026 Anniston · Gadsden

7 players · average NTRP 3.17 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-08-12Lost 02
L#1 DoublesJoyce Anderson / Heather Mooneyham vs Rebecca Sims / Allison York1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesLisa Ivey / Nora Stokes vs Carolyne Marsh / Brittany Miller2-6, 7-5, 0-1
2026-08-05Split 11
L#1 DoublesJoyce Anderson / Heather Mooneyham vs Brittany Miller / Wendy Uhrin2-6, 6-0, 0-1
W#2 DoublesLisa Ivey / Magen Bearden vs Carolyne Marsh / Drue Taylor6-3, 1-6, 1-0
2026-08-02Lost 02
L#1 DoublesJoyce Anderson / Heather Mooneyham vs Brittany Miller / Wendy Uhrin6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMagen Bearden / Lisa Ivey vs Tammy Morrow / Rebecca Sims6-2, 2-6, 0-1
2026-07-22Lost 02
L#2 DoublesMagen Bearden / Lisa Ivey vs Lacy Jackson / Tammy Morrow3-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesHeather Mooneyham / Nora Stokes vs Carolyne Marsh / Drue Taylor7-5, 1-6, 0-1
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 · Gadsden
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Anniston Women's 6.5 Combo31931192
2Pell City women's 6.5 combo133919112

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 2.84 estimated across 4 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.

3.24
Allie Dutton
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.77
Angela Weissgerber
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.72
ANGELA Dutton
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.62
Nora Stokes
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Heather Mooneyham
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Lisa Ivey
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Magen Bearden
usually #2 Doubles 64%, also #3 Doubles 27% · 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.

Allie Dutton + ANGELA Dutton5943% games−1.5% vs expected
Magen Bearden + Angela Weissgerber2346% gamesnot enough data
Lisa Ivey + Magen Bearden123 matchesnot enough data
Angela Weissgerber + Nora Stokes033 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
Allie Dutton
24W–33L career · 4 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.24
3
Angela Weissgerber
11W–17L career · 9 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.77
3
ANGELA Dutton
26W–46L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
2.72
Nora Stokes
14W–26L career · 4 lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
2.62
Heather Mooneyham
0W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
not enough data
Lisa Ivey
1W–3L career · 4 lines in 2026
not enough data
Magen Bearden
10W–8L career · 11 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.