Teams

Bright

Combo · Combo 7.5W

10 players · average NTRP 3.80 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-24Won 30
W#1 DoublesKayla Hubble / Kim Schwartz vs Casi Allen / Brandi Vincent3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesStacy Duffell / Kelly Hallmark vs Lori Dornhecker / Lorie Balderas6-1, 7-5
W#3 DoublesGentry Fields / Cody Burns vs Heather Brewer / Kristi Briley6-1, 6-1
2026-08-17vs JohnsonWon 10
W#2 DoublesEmilee Wuthrich / Sarah Post vs Cindy Byrd / Veronica Gutierrez6-3, 6-4
2026-08-03vs Briley/RossWon 21
W#1 DoublesKayla Hubble / Kim Schwartz vs Casi Allen / Heather Brewer6-1, 7-5
W#2 DoublesAllison Bright / Cody Burns vs Hallye Phillips / Vanessa Arredondo7-5, 6-2
L#3 DoublesGentry Fields / Sarah Post vs Christy Ross / Archana Rao6-2, 5-7, 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 standings for Combo 7.5W 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 3.54 estimated across 10 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.

3.78
Gentry Fields
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.78
Allison Bright
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.77
Kayla Hubble
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.64
Stacy Duffell
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.62
Emilee Wuthrich
published 4
3.54
Cody Burns
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.44
Kelly Hallmark
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.41
Kim Schwartz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.41
Lara Coleman
published
3.02
Sarah Post
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
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.

Kayla Hubble + Kim Schwartz7260% games+0.8% vs expected
Gentry Fields + Kayla Hubble191059% games+0.4% vs expected
Allison Bright + Stacy Duffell181354% games−2.6% vs expected
Allison Bright + Lara Coleman21043% games−5.6% vs expected
Sarah Post + Kelly Hallmark6846% games−13.9% vs expected
Sarah Post + Lara Coleman6554% gamesnot enough data
Lara Coleman + Cody Burns6163% gamesnot enough data
Kelly Hallmark + Stacy Duffell5156% gamesnot 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
Gentry Fields
32W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%94%5%
3.78
4
Allison Bright
37W–36L career · 1 line in 2026
2%94%4%
3.78
Kayla Hubble
41W–22L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.77
Stacy Duffell
50W–37L career · 1 line in 2026
15%85%<1%
3.64
4
Emilee Wuthrich
14W–8L career · no lines in 2026
17%82%<1%
3.62
3.5
Cody Burns
55W–30L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.54
Kelly Hallmark
70W–51L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%66%34%
3.44
Kim Schwartz
49W–36L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%76%24%
3.41
Lara Coleman
44W–36L career · no lines in 2026
<1%76%24%
3.41
3.5
Sarah Post
113W–135L career · 2 lines in 2026
43%57%<1%
3.02

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.