Teams

Anniston Women's 6.5 Combo

2026 Anniston · Gadsden

8 players · average NTRP 3.12 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Flight standings2 teams · Gadsden
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Anniston Women's 6.5 Combo31931192
2Pell City women's 6.5 combo133919112

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 2.85 estimated across 4 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.

3.12
Allison York
usually #1 Doubles 88%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published 3.5
2.93
Brittany Miller
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.91
Carolyne Marsh
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.44
Allie Goggans
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
Drue Taylor
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Lacy Jackson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Rebecca Sims
usually #1 Doubles 88%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published
Wendy Uhrin
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · 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.

Allison York + Rebecca Sims7067% gamesnot enough data
Lacy Jackson + Rebecca Sims404 matchesnot enough data
Carolyne Marsh + Drue Taylor213 matchesnot enough data
Allie Goggans + Rebecca Sims123 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.

3.5
Allison York
17W–3L career · 8 lines in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.12
3
Brittany Miller
3W–2L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
2.93
3
Carolyne Marsh
9W–4L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
2.91
3
Allie Goggans
5W–8L career · 4 lines in 2026
68%32%<1%
2.44
Drue Taylor
7W–2L career · 6 lines in 2026
not enough data
Lacy Jackson
10W–2L career · 6 lines in 2026
not enough data
Rebecca Sims
16W–5L career · 8 lines in 2026
not enough data
Wendy Uhrin
4W–3L career · 7 lines in 2026
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.