Teams

Campbell, Leslie

2026 Combo 18 & Over-JXN · Women 7.5

12 players · average NTRP 3.67 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2026-08-18vs Brewer, EliseWon 21
W#1 DoublesJennifer Otto / Laura McMahon vs Carley Fetz / Rhonda Williams6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJessie Humble / Lauren Ingram vs Anna Miskelly / Christine Waldrop6-4, 5-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMadison Curtis / Mary Kate Diltz vs MacKenzie Carmody / Elizabeth Randall6-2, 1-6, 0-1
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 standings5 teams · Women 7.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Jackson, Susan1021324
2Adams, Amber000000
3Brewer, Elise000000
4Campbell, Leslie000000
5Mitchell, ReJohnna0112534

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 3.28 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.

3.87
Madison Curtis
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.73
Chiali Register
published 4
3.66
Jessie Humble
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.62
Taylor Torrence
published
3.42
Jennifer Otto
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.23
Mary Beth Cantrell
published
3.18
Deanna Tubbs
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.05
Lauren Ingram
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.02
Amanda Galey
published 3.5
3.02
Lauren Mashburn
published
2.93
Mary Kate Diltz
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.64
Leslie Owens
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.

Mary Kate Diltz + Deanna Tubbs8165% games+11.8% vs expected
Jessie Humble + Jennifer Otto213 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.

Madison Curtis
9W–4L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.87
4
Chiali Register
21W–8L career · no lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.73
Jessie Humble
37W–21L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.66
Taylor Torrence
4W–4L career · no lines in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.62
Jennifer Otto
35W–20L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.42
Mary Beth Cantrell
31W–34L career · no lines in 2026
<1%5%95%
3.23
3.5
Deanna Tubbs
23W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.18
Lauren Ingram
26W–10L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.05
3.5
Amanda Galey
25W–27L career · no lines in 2026
43%56%<1%
3.02
Lauren Mashburn
21W–10L career · no lines in 2026
<1%43%57%
3.02
Mary Kate Diltz
29W–16L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%<1%>99%
2.93
Leslie Owens
10W–11L career · no lines in 2026
15%84%1%
2.64

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.