Teams

CTL18/PRICE/CTC

Combo 18 & Over · 18 & Over Combo Women - 2.5 Night

7 players · average NTRP 2.50 / SOUTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2023-12-06vs CTL18/Thurston/CSPWon 10
W#1 DoublesJessica Gibbons / Emily Bell vs Deyaska Sweatman / Lori Triplett3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2023-10-15vs HHTL18/Bailey/ChaplinSplit 11
L#1 DoublesSamantha Yager / Valeryia Spandorfer vs Melissa Forrest / Lindsay Copelan2-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesNatasha Ferguson Dennison / Jessica Gibbons vs Lisa Bailey / Kristin Tyler6-2, 6-3
2023-09-27vs CTL18/Amodio/WWDLost 02
L#1 DoublesJessica Price / Samantha Yager vs Beth Amodio / Madison Pickrel1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJessica Gibbons / Emily Bell vs Rachel Kennedy / Line Rahman2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2023-04-12vs CTL18/Thurston/CSPLost 01
L#1 DoublesSamantha Yager / Abby Anderson vs Rhonda Meisner / Amy Malcom2-6, 4-6
2023-04-02vs CTL18/Amodio/WWDLost 01
L#1 DoublesNatasha Ferguson Dennison / Samantha Yager vs Suneeta Kamana / Barbara Levy0-6, 6-7
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 18 & Over Combo Women - 2.5 Night 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 2.27 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.

2.60
Jessica Gibbons
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.35
MacY Whitesides
published
2.27
Madeline Swalgren
published
Amanda Edwards
published 2.5
2.08
Samantha Yager
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.06
Caroline Higgins
published 2.5
Jessica Price
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.

Caroline Higgins + MacY Whitesides5547% games+7.4% vs expected
Madeline Swalgren + MacY Whitesides13956% games+2.1% vs expected
Amanda Edwards + Jessica Price61442% games+0.7% vs expected
Jessica Price + Jessica Gibbons71142% games−1.2% vs expected
Amanda Edwards + Samantha Yager3939% games−2.8% vs expected
Caroline Higgins + Madeline Swalgren2536% gamesnot enough data
Samantha Yager + Madeline Swalgren224 matchesnot enough data
Caroline Higgins + Samantha Yager033 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.

Jessica Gibbons
23W–35L career · 3 lines in 2024
24%76%<1%
2.60
MacY Whitesides
24W–20L career · no lines in 2024
0%86%14%
2.35
Madeline Swalgren
20W–27L career · no lines in 2024
0%95%5%
2.27
2.5
Amanda Edwards
10W–25L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Samantha Yager
23W–61L career · 4 lines in 2024
0%>99%<1%
2.08
2.5
Caroline Higgins
18W–19L career · no lines in 2024
0%>99%<1%
2.06
Jessica Price
24W–63L career · no 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.