Teams

GR-Haislip (18s 4.0W SP)

2026 Neuse River Adult 18 & Over League · 4.0 Women 18 & over

11 players · average NTRP 3.90 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-05-14vs NB-Nuckolls (18s 4.0W SP)Won 30
W#1 DoublesSherry Smith / Josie Ottaviani vs Alicia Alford / Catherine Boles6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesSamantha Taylor Haislip / Megan Parker vs Sarah Corey / Maggie Warren6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAshley Elise / Kascia Henderson vs Missy Taylor / Helen Tyson6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2026-04-18vs GCC-Pons/Smith (4.0 18s W)Won 40
W#1 DoublesIna Jones / Sherry Smith vs Feng-Ling Wu / Beth Hopkins6-2, 6-3
W#1 SinglesSamantha Taylor Haislip vs Catherine Land6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesHolly Medlin / Lauren Turbeville vs MI HWA LEE / Roberta Veluci-Marlow6-3, 7-6
W#2 SinglesBrooke Brann vs Addie Grace Gibbs6-1, 6-2
2026-04-14vs GCC-Pons/Smith (4.0 18s W)Won 50
W#1 DoublesJustine Barnes / Jill Davis vs Cassidy Johnson / Kerry Smith2-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#1 SinglesBrooke Brann vs Jamie Harford6-1, 4-0
W#2 DoublesHolly Medlin / Carol Taylor vs Catherine Land / Monica Carlson6-1, 7-6
W#2 SinglesSamantha Taylor Haislip vs Jennie Schwartz6-4, 7-5
W#3 DoublesKascia Henderson / Ashley Elise vs Feng-Ling Wu / MI HWA LEE7-5, 7-6
2026-04-01vs GCC-Pons/Smith (4.0 18s W)Lost 23
L#1 DoublesJosie Ottaviani / Carol Taylor vs Cassidy Johnson / Eleanor Kipp1-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesSamantha Taylor Haislip vs Addie Grace Gibbs6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesLauren Turbeville / Justine Barnes vs Catherine Land / Roberta Veluci-Marlow0-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 SinglesBrooke Brann vs Jennie Schwartz3-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesKascia Henderson / Ashley Elise vs Diane Pons / Feng-Ling Wu1-6, 6-3, 0-1
2026-03-29vs GCC-Pons/Smith (4.0 18s W)Lost 13
W#1 DoublesJosie Ottaviani / Holly Medlin vs Roberta Veluci-Marlow / Eleanor Kipp6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesSamantha Taylor Haislip / Brooke Brann vs Cassidy Johnson / Addie Grace Gibbs5-7, 4-6
L#2 SinglesKascia Henderson vs Jennie Schwartz3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesLauren Turbeville / Megan Parker vs Monica Carlson / Beth Hopkins2-6, 2-6
2026-03-25vs NB-Nuckolls (18s 4.0W SP)Won 20
W#1 DoublesJosie Ottaviani / Holly Medlin vs Alicia Alford / Anne Nuckolls6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesJustine Barnes / Brooke Brann vs Middleton Hinckley / Sarah Corey6-0, 6-2
2026-03-05vs NB-Nuckolls (18s 4.0W SP)Won 32
W#1 DoublesIna Jones / Sherry Smith vs Maggie Warren / Anne Nuckolls6-3, 6-3
L#1 SinglesSamantha Taylor Haislip vs Catherine Boles6-7, 3-6
W#2 DoublesCarol Taylor / Lauren Turbeville vs Helen Tyson / Melissa Rankin6-1, 6-3
L#2 SinglesAshley Elise vs Anna-Katherine Haidt1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesJustine Barnes / Kascia Henderson vs Middleton Hinckley / Caroline Corey6-2, 6-3
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 standings3 teams · 4.0 Women 18 & over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1GR-Haislip (18s 4.0W SP)62301023239
2GCC-Pons/Smith (4.0 18s W)62221841330
3NB-Nuckolls (18s 4.0W SP)0883266424

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 3.56 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.

3.92
Josie Ottaviani
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.81
Ina Jones
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.74
Brooke Brann
usually #2 Singles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.73
Holly Medlin
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.67
Samantha Taylor Haislip
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.58
Justine Barnes
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.45
Carol Taylor
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.38
Lauren Turbeville
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.29
Ashley Elise
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.07
Kascia Henderson
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Singles 20% · published
Megan Parker
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.

Josie Ottaviani + Holly Medlin3362% games+9.0% vs expected
Kascia Henderson + Ashley Elise3252% gamesnot enough data
Lauren Turbeville + Ashley Elise314 matchesnot enough data
Brooke Brann + Kascia Henderson303 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.

Josie Ottaviani
15W–11L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
3.92
4
Ina Jones
17W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%92%7%
3.81
4
Brooke Brann
12W–7L career · 5 lines in 2026
3%95%2%
3.74
4
Holly Medlin
11W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.73
Samantha Taylor Haislip
11W–6L career · 6 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.67
Justine Barnes
14W–5L career · 4 lines in 2026
26%74%<1%
3.58
4
Carol Taylor
11W–20L career · 3 lines in 2026
66%34%<1%
3.45
Lauren Turbeville
8W–11L career · 4 lines in 2026
82%18%<1%
3.38
3.5
Ashley Elise
20W–20L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%94%5%
3.29
Kascia Henderson
34W–44L career · 5 lines in 2026
30%70%<1%
3.07
Megan Parker
2W–1L career · no 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.