Teams

RID HARBUCK

2025 FW Adult 18 & Over League - Ladies · Friday Ladies 4.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.92 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-04-18vs RTC CURTIS/PRUNERLost 03
L#2 DoublesKristi Ingram / Brooke Worsham vs Heather Steele Curtis / Jennifer Pine4-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesMichele Colafrancesco vs Christine Gerhard1-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesSamantha Daggett / Sarah Harbuck vs Melanie Seger / Cathy Ducanes1-6, 2-6
2025-04-15vs WAL MIONEWon 20
W#1 DoublesKatherine Graham / Brooke Worsham vs Jill Lawless / Karla Woody6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesEmily Boydston / Meg Pope vs Spring McCurdy / Joy Narciso6-1, 6-2
2025-04-11vs RID MALONELost 01
L#3 DoublesKristi Ingram / Samantha Daggett vs Erin Aldrich / Kim Catalano1-6, 4-6
2025-04-08vs BIR HENDERSON/CURLEYSplit 11
W#2 DoublesEmily Boydston / Britni McDaniel vs Lisa Swauger / Shawna Maginniss4-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#3 DoublesDrew Brigati / Kristi Ingram vs Theresa Rhoades / Natalie Ricketts2-6, 1-6
2025-03-14vs WAG HOLLANDSplit 11
L#1 SinglesMichele Colafrancesco vs Jennifer Lillis3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesDrew Brigati / Amanda Sevier vs Jennifer Cole / Tammy French7-5, 1-6, 1-0
2025-03-07vs TRO BLAKEWon 10
W#3 DoublesKristi Ingram / Brooke Worsham vs Donna Hall / Kat Radeloff3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2025-02-28vs RTC NORTHCUTTWon 20
W#2 DoublesEmily Boydston / Drew Brigati vs Kimberly Northcutt / Kim Castro6-7, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesBritni McDaniel / Samantha Daggett vs Casey Gokenbach / Lori Sciremammano3-6, 7-5, 1-0
2025-02-27vs RTC CURTISLost 02
L#1 SinglesMichele Colafrancesco vs Kelda Rusher3-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesEmily Boydston / Drew Brigati vs Cathy Ducanes / Angela Gallegos3-6, 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 standings15 teams · Friday Ladies 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1RTC ALBUS8032819253
2RC KEIPER71261433321
3CCC PRINCE/KALE71271333314
4WAG HOLLAND62241638322
5RTC MELVILLE53261436326
6RTC CURTIS53251536339
7CHS RICE/SCHULTZ53241639366
8RTC NORTHCUTT44182248373
9CCC GRALAPP44172350372
10RID HARBUCK44182250371
11BIR HENDERSON/CURLEY26192148383
12HV TONTI26142654408
13TRO BLAKE26162454395
14TCU HUBER17122857415
15CCP CAUWELS/MCCLENDON0893163431

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 3.52 estimated across 12 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.

3.97
Christina Cung
usually #1 Singles 56%, also #2 Singles 22% · published 4.5
3.65
Katherine Graham
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.64
Drew Brigati
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.61
Emily Boydston
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published 4
3.57
Kristi Ingram
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.57
Samantha Daggett
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Singles 29% · published
3.56
Brooke Worsham
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.40
Michele Colafrancesco
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
3.37
Britni McDaniel
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.37
Amanda Sevier
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 44% · published 3.5
3.25
Sarah Harbuck
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.24
Meg Pope
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
Janelle Mosiello
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.

Emily Boydston + Britni McDaniel6264% games+11.6% vs expected
Brooke Worsham + Katherine Graham3257% games+10.9% vs expected
Emily Boydston + Drew Brigati3249% games+1.5% vs expected
Christina Cung + Drew Brigati404 matchesnot enough data
Drew Brigati + Katherine Graham044 matchesnot enough data
Meg Pope + Michele Colafrancesco033 matchesnot enough data
Christina Cung + Katherine Graham033 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.

4.5
Christina Cung
25W–22L career · 9 lines in 2025
59%41%<1%
3.97
Katherine Graham
3W–11L career · 5 lines in 2025
13%87%<1%
3.65
4
Drew Brigati
18W–13L career · 6 lines in 2025
14%85%<1%
3.64
4
Emily Boydston
21W–9L career · 7 lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.61
Kristi Ingram
4W–5L career · 4 lines in 2025
30%70%<1%
3.57
Samantha Daggett
9W–12L career · 7 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.57
4
Brooke Worsham
5W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.56
Michele Colafrancesco
2W–13L career · 3 lines in 2025
79%21%<1%
3.40
3.5
Britni McDaniel
20W–17L career · 9 lines in 2025
<1%84%15%
3.37
3.5
Amanda Sevier
13W–5L career · 9 lines in 2025
<1%85%15%
3.37
Sarah Harbuck
1W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
3%95%3%
3.25
Meg Pope
10W–30L career · 5 lines in 2025
98%2%<1%
3.24
Janelle Mosiello
0W–2L career · no 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.