Teams

3.0W Tims

2024 Team Singles Tournament-NE · 3.0 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.20 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2024-02-25vs 3.0W HowardWon 21
W#1 SinglesEmmy Millwood vs Laura C Yeatman6-3, 6-3
W#2 SinglesAmanda Snell vs Patti Stanley6-1, 6-3
L#3 SinglesAnn Morgan vs Ashli Dunn1-6, 4-6
2024-02-25vs 3.0W BurksWon 20
W#1 SinglesEmmy Millwood vs Emily Decker6-3, 6-4
W#2 SinglesLacey Jennings vs Mary Morgan Burks6-1, 6-0
2024-02-24vs 3.0W RodgersLost 12
W#1 SinglesEmmy Millwood vs Bailey Rodgers7-5, 7-5
L#2 SinglesBrooke Tims vs Lindsey Garner7-5, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 SinglesMisty Moseley vs Taylor Loosier1-6, 1-6
2024-02-24vs 3.0W KusekWon 21
W#1 SinglesLacey Jennings vs Maray McIntyre6-3, 6-4
W#2 SinglesAmanda Snell vs Carie Costello7-6, 6-4
L#3 SinglesAnn Morgan vs Michelle McKim6-2, 1-6, 0-1
2024-02-23vs 3.0W GammillLost 12
W#1 SinglesMichie Cotton vs Anna McCullough6-2, 6-1
L#2 SinglesBrooke Tims vs Hester Lowe6-2, 1-6, 0-1
L#3 SinglesMisty Moseley vs Lauren Reed1-6, 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 standings6 teams · 3.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
13.0W Gammill4111410118
23.0W Howard419615134
33.0W Tims328714126
43.0W Rodgers328717133
53.0W Kusek1451023158
63.0W Burks0541123142

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 2.93 estimated across 5 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
Michie Cotton
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
Brooke Tims
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3.5
2.99
Emmy Millwood
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
2.79
Misty Moseley
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
Amanda Snell
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
2.73
Ann Morgan
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.73
Lacey Jennings
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · 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.

Amy Denton Maggio + Ann Morgan8357% games+6.2% vs expected
Amy Denton Maggio + Michie Cotton404 matchesnot enough data
Amy Denton Maggio + Brooke Tims224 matchesnot enough data
Emmy Millwood + Ann Morgan224 matchesnot enough data
Michie Cotton + Brooke Tims303 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.

Michie Cotton
119W–25L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%76%24%
3.41
3.5
Brooke Tims
36W–23L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Emmy Millwood
32W–23L career · 3 lines in 2024
52%48%<1%
2.99
Misty Moseley
46W–69L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%94%5%
2.79
3
Amanda Snell
41W–23L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Ann Morgan
23W–14L career · 2 lines in 2024
4%94%2%
2.73
3
Amy Denton Maggio
36W–29L career · no lines in 2024
4%94%2%
2.73
Lacey Jennings
12W–5L career · 2 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.