Teams

AKupchella/AJeter (OPRC)

2026 Combo Doubles 18 & Over League · 18 & Over Combo 5.5 Women

13 players · average NTRP 2.67 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 upcoming · 4 played
Sep 11 9:30 AM
vs
Olde Providence Racquet Club
Sep 18 9:30 AM
vs
Olde Providence Racquet Club
Sep 25 9:30 AM
vs N/A
Amanda KupchellaAmanda Jeter
Oct 2 9:30 AM
vs
Olde Providence Racquet Club
Oct 9 9:30 AM
vs
Tournament Players Club Piper Glen
2026-09-04vs KHudson (Piper Glen)Lost 03
L#1 DoublesAmanda Jeter / Ashley Kreth vs Keely Hudson / Jennifer Lang3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesCaroline Chambers / Amanda Kupchella vs Kathy Harborne / Hannah Lambert0-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesMeghan Maciag / Mollie Cooke vs Anna Medica / Alexandra Pavleszek0-6, 1-6
2026-08-28vs SLauer (Brookhaven)Won 21
W#1 DoublesMadelynn Bates / Mollie Cooke vs Shawna Lauer / Brenda Tobia6-0, 6-3
L#2 DoublesJennifer Hanly / Amanda Jeter vs Jennifer Anthony / Laura Hunter6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAmanda Kupchella / Annabet Smith vs Lauren Robarge / Rachael Weiss6-1, 6-4
2026-08-21vs CSoliday (Jeff Adams)Lost 12
W#1 DoublesMadelynn Bates / Caroline Chambers vs Lauren Phipps / Lauren Call6-0, 6-3
L#2 DoublesAmy Snead / Ashley Kreth vs Meghan Lluberas / Lindsey Lucenti5-7, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesAmanda Jeter / Karen Reti vs Margaret Koon / Catherine Matthews6-3, 2-6, 0-1
2026-08-14vs AFilingeri (OPRC)Won 21
W#1 DoublesKaren Reti / Molly Cook vs Amber Filingeri / Jennifer Moore7-5, 6-4
L#2 DoublesAmanda Kupchella / Lauren Packman vs Nannette Markham / Stacey Lee5-7, 3-6
W#3 DoublesAshley Kreth / Meghan Maciag vs Angie Mehrizi / Sarah Om7-6, 4-6, 1-0
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 standings22 teams · 18 & Over Combo 5.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1TMacuga/Sweeney (Park Crossing)3090118
2KDavis/ABroemel (Queens)2060236
3DCallinan/KGibson (Raintree)2051243
4KHudson (Piper Glen)1030017
5AKupchella/AJeter (OPRC)1021334
6IMcLeod (Carmel)1142549
7CSoliday (Jeff Adams)1133652
8GRhew (OPRC)1133760
9SLauer (Brookhaven)1124859
10KDowdy (Piper Glen)12451077
11JKeller (Firethorne)000000
12KKeen/LMadonna (WSRC)000000
13APessina (Carmel)000000
14DPollack/Kilduff (Sardis)000000
15BMalley (Longview)000000
16PRhame/GLiz (Park Road)000000
17YKwon (Life Time)000000
18CPrice (Charlotte Country Club)000000
19SDeVries (PCC)02151066
20ACombs/RMaietta (BCC)02151064
21AFilingeri (OPRC)02151070
22DBurns/SPoplin (Jeff Adams)02061274

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 2.43 estimated across 13 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.

3.00
Madelynn Bates
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.78
Jennifer Hanly
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.75
Ashley Kreth
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.66
Karen Reti
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.43
Mollie Cooke
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.38
Lauren Packman
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.38
Amanda Kupchella
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
2.35
Annabet Smith
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.33
Amanda Jeter
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
2.27
Caroline Chambers
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.25
Amy Snead
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.00
Meghan Maciag
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
1.95
Callie Lloyd
published 2.5
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.

Amanda Kupchella + Caroline Chambers3251% games+8.5% vs expected
Lauren Packman + Amanda Jeter213 matchesnot enough data
Amanda Jeter + Karen Reti213 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.

3
Madelynn Bates
53W–35L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%49%51%
3.00
3
Jennifer Hanly
13W–11L career · 1 line in 2026
2%92%5%
2.78
3
Ashley Kreth
8W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
2.75
Karen Reti
8W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%13%87%
2.66
Mollie Cooke
8W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%68%32%
2.43
Lauren Packman
5W–17L career · 1 line in 2026
0%80%20%
2.38
2.5
Amanda Kupchella
24W–27L career · type S · 4 lines in 2026
0%81%19%
2.38
2.5
Annabet Smith
2W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
0%86%14%
2.35
2.5
Amanda Jeter
11W–21L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
0%88%12%
2.33
2.5
Caroline Chambers
6W–5L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
0%95%5%
2.27
2.5
Amy Snead
2W–13L career · 1 line in 2026
0%97%3%
2.25
Meghan Maciag
1W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.00
2.5
Callie Lloyd
1W–6L career · type S · no lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.95

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.