Teams

STC MILLER

2026 FW Adult 18 & Over League - Ladies · Friday Ladies 3.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.00 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-04-17vs VAQ BYRNESLost 12
W#1 SinglesDiana Ahmad vs April Solley6-3, 6-4
L#2 SinglesLana Johnson vs Kelsey Williams3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesRachel Hayes / Amber Hupp vs Shawn Batjer / Sunny Novacheck4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2026-04-10vs DCC KYRISHLost 12
L#2 DoublesRuth Sine / Mahtab Abghari vs Kristen Vest / Melissa Wicker3-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesAmber Hupp vs Julie Reece0-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesDaisy Bartlett / Deanna Sullivan vs Mary Cooper / Amber Parnell6-4, 6-2
2026-04-03vs CCC MOROWWon 30
W#1 DoublesLana Johnson / Natasha Chevalier vs Brittany Rico / Amanda Bowditch6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJulie-MyTrang Pham / Daisy Bartlett vs Jennifer Hurd / Vanessa Jordan6-2, 6-3
W#2 SinglesMahtab Abghari vs Mary Katherine Clarke6-0, 6-1
2026-03-27vs WAL MIONEWon 40
W#1 SinglesDiana Ahmad vs Tina Pierce7-5, 7-5
W#2 DoublesMahtab Abghari / Ruth Sine vs Rose Avery / Susan Hayslip6-1, 6-3
W#2 SinglesLana Johnson vs Ana Lucas6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAmber Hupp / Jennifer Kelly vs Barbie McAnalley / Patsy Winston6-3, 6-4
2026-03-13vs RC WITTENWon 10
W#2 DoublesJulie-MyTrang Pham / Daisy Bartlett vs Hannah Witten / Sara Wagner3-6, 7-5, 1-0
2026-03-06vs RTC CATESSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLana Johnson / Lauri Horton vs Laura Stokes / Cecilia Gallardo Solano0-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesMahtab Abghari / Jennifer Kelly vs Tabitha Benedict / Sherri DeFraites6-1, 6-3
2026-02-27vs CCC QUEVEDOSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLana Johnson / Ashley Miller vs Pamela Gilchrist / Haley Seaver5-7, 2-6
W#3 DoublesStephanie Abiodun / Julie-MyTrang Pham vs Vivian Campbell / Kasey Schrimpf3-6, 6-1, 1-0
2026-02-20vs SOAKS EDDINSSplit 22
W#1 DoublesAshley Miller / Lana Johnson vs Pamela Williams / Angie Eddins6-7, 7-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesAmber Hupp vs Edith Alvarez2-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDaisy Bartlett / Julie-MyTrang Pham vs Misha Pfaff / Courtney Lackey6-0, 7-5
L#2 SinglesRuth Sine vs Julie Lauterbach3-6, 1-6
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 standings for Friday Ladies 3.0 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 2.85 estimated across 13 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.

3.06
Diana Ahmad
usually #2 Singles 57%, also #1 Singles 43% · published 3
3.01
Nicole DeSensi - Willis
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.98
Ruth Sine
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.94
Natasha Chevalier
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
2.86
Lana Johnson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.86
Deanna Sullivan
usually #3 Doubles 36%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published 3
2.85
Daisy Bartlett
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.82
Stephanie Abiodun
usually #1 Doubles 29%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
2.81
Lauri Horton
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.78
Mahtab Abghari
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.75
Julie-MyTrang Pham
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.72
Amanda Supple
published 3
2.60
Amber Hupp
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3
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.

Stephanie Abiodun + Deanna Sullivan5164% games+10.4% vs expected
Deanna Sullivan + Nicole DeSensi - Willis3350% games+0.9% vs expected
Ruth Sine + Mahtab Abghari5457% games−4.2% vs expected
Lauri Horton + Natasha Chevalier314 matchesnot enough data
Julie-MyTrang Pham + Daisy Bartlett404 matchesnot enough data
Amber Hupp + Ruth Sine224 matchesnot enough data
Amanda Supple + Daisy Bartlett314 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Abiodun + Natasha Chevalier303 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
Diana Ahmad
27W–33L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
3.06
Nicole DeSensi - Willis
24W–16L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%48%52%
3.01
Ruth Sine
15W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%57%43%
2.98
Natasha Chevalier
30W–21L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%66%34%
2.94
Lana Johnson
20W–13L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%84%16%
2.86
3
Deanna Sullivan
27W–27L career · 10 lines in 2026
1%84%15%
2.86
3
Daisy Bartlett
8W–5L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%86%14%
2.85
Stephanie Abiodun
15W–18L career · 7 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
2.82
Lauri Horton
12W–5L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
2.81
Mahtab Abghari
11W–11L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
2.78
Julie-MyTrang Pham
6W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
2.75
3
Amanda Supple
8W–7L career · no lines in 2026
6%92%2%
2.72
3
Amber Hupp
12W–14L career · 4 lines in 2026
24%76%<1%
2.60

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.