Teams

Taylor/18&O/4.0/MD/RPAR

2025 Ruston Mixed 18 & Over · 4.0 Ruston (18&O) Mixed

7 players · average NTRP 3.75 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-07-28vs Fendley/18&O/4.0/MD/RPARLost 02
L#1 DoublesWen Huang / Tish Jowers vs Graham Lemoine / Mary Fendley4-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#2 DoublesChandler Ashworth / Barbara Johnson vs Alan Smith / Katie Cracraft2-6, 4-6
2025-07-26vs Fendley/18&O/4.0/MD/RPARWon 21
W#1 DoublesWen Huang / Elise Nichols vs Graham Lemoine / Katie Cracraft4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesVijaydeep Singh / Tabitha Nankya vs Mary Fendley / Alan Smith6-1, 6-0
L#3 DoublesGage Batterton / Tish Jowers vs Collin Wick / DeEtte Wick6-7, 1-6
2025-07-21vs Fendley/18&O/4.0/MD/RPARWon 20
W#1 DoublesWen Huang / Elise Nichols vs Collin Wick / DeEtte Wick6-0, 6-3
W#3 DoublesTabitha Nankya / Gage Batterton vs Graham Lemoine / Mary Fendley6-7, 6-1, 1-0
2025-07-07vs Fendley/18&O/4.0/MD/RPARWon 30
W#1 DoublesVijaydeep Singh / Tabitha Nankya vs Mary Fendley / Graham Lemoine6-4, 6-0
W#2 DoublesChandler Ashworth / Tish Jowers vs Alan Smith / Lauryn Brooks3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesChristopher Taylor / Chloe Batterton vs Collin Wick / DeEtte Wick6-3, 6-2
2025-07-06vs Fendley/18&O/4.0/MD/RPARWon 20
W#1 DoublesVijaydeep Singh / Tabitha Nankya vs Mary Fendley / Graham Lemoine6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesChandler Ashworth / Chloe Batterton vs Collin Wick / DeEtte Wick6-1, 6-4
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 4.0 Ruston (18&O) Mixed 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 3.78 estimated across 1 rated player. 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.

3.78
Chloe Batterton
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
Chandler Ashworth
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Elise Nichols
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Gage Batterton
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Tabitha Nankya
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Tish Jowers
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Vijaydeep Singh
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Vijaydeep Singh + Tabitha Nankya303 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.

4
Chloe Batterton
6W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.78
3.5
Chandler Ashworth
4W–1L career · type M · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Elise Nichols
2W–0L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Gage Batterton
4W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tabitha Nankya
6W–0L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tish Jowers
2W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Vijaydeep Singh
4W–0L career · 3 lines in 2025
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.