Teams

Baugh

2025 Tri-Level 18 & Over · 2.5 - 3.0 - 3.5 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.00 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule10 played
2025-07-21vs Tiffin 18 Tri 2025Lost 02
L#1 DoublesAlexis Hambrick / Elizabeth Lotz vs Jeanne Self / Elaine Vaughn2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesAmy Johnson / Megan Dixon vs Amanda Thornton / Kimberly Green4-6, 0-6
2025-07-14vs Reeves Tri-levelWon 30
W#1 DoublesMegan Dixon / Brandi Oliver vs Jodi Page / Tracie Thompson6-3, 7-6
W#2 DoublesAli Jones / Tanya Baugh vs Melissa Aycock / Emily Hammock6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Lotz / Abby Thornton vs Amy Reeves / Tammy Willis6-1, 6-2
2025-07-07vs DiceLost 02
L#1 DoublesAlexis Hambrick / Elizabeth Lotz vs Casey McKean / Julia Matthews2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesTanya Baugh / Elizabeth Mitchell vs Meagan Robinson / Elizabeth Marbury4-6, 3-6
2025-06-30vs Webster Tri-levelLost 03
L#1 DoublesTanya Baugh / Stacy Creel vs Stacy Mason / Debbie Haythorn5-7, 5-7
L#2 DoublesStephonie McCrory / Elizabeth Mitchell vs Angela Kelley / Cecelia Gautney3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesDanielle Ryan / Amy Johnson vs Beth Fields / Liz Wilcoxson1-6, 3-6
2025-06-23vs Walker Tri LevelWon 21
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Lotz / Kim Clayton vs Jill Archer / Dawn Sparks6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesTanya Baugh / Elizabeth Mitchell vs Tori Bendall / Rhonda Pounders6-4, 6-1
L#3 DoublesAmy Johnson / Megan Dixon vs Kelsey Gilmer / Nina McNatt2-6, 0-6
2025-06-21vs Reeves Tri-levelWon 20
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Lotz / Tanya Baugh vs Laura Kroeger / Tammy Willis6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesBrandi Oliver / Megan Dixon vs Theresa Burns / Emily Hammock7-5, 4-6, 1-0
2025-06-16vs Tiffin 18 Tri 2025Won 21
W#1 DoublesAlexis Hambrick / Elizabeth Lotz vs Jeanne Self / Sheila Smith6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesTanya Baugh / Stephonie McCrory vs Delaney Richardson / Donna Murray6-2, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesAmy Johnson / Megan Dixon vs Amanda Thornton / Rachel Michael3-6, 4-6
2025-06-08vs DiceLost 03
L#1 DoublesKim Clayton / Ali Jones vs Julia Matthews / Casey McKean2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesDanielle Ryan / Beth Fennel vs Alaina Anderson / Jenifer Merry0-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesMegan Dixon / Amy Johnson vs Molly Call / Kelly Massey1-6, 1-6
2025-06-02vs Webster Tri-levelLost 12
L#1 DoublesStacy Creel / Kim Clayton vs Emma Claire Bragwell / Stacy Mason0-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesBeth Fennel / Elizabeth Mitchell vs Cherie Webster / Anisa Thompson6-1, 6-0
L#3 DoublesBrandi Oliver / Amy Johnson vs Anita Marks / Didi Vardaman4-6, 4-6
2025-05-22vs Walker Tri LevelWon 21
W#1 DoublesAlexis Hambrick / Elizabeth Lotz vs Stacey Strickland / Cindy Walker3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAli Jones / Abby Thornton vs Monica Moon / Nina McNatt6-3, 6-3
L#3 DoublesAmy Johnson / Brandi Oliver vs Tori Bendall / Kelsey Gilmer1-6, 4-6
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 standings6 teams · 2.5 - 3.0 - 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Dice8223718191
2Tiffin 18 Tri 202582201024231
3Webster Tri-level64191124234
4Baugh55141636281
5Walker Tri Level37111941299
6Reeves Tri-level01032756348

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 2.75 estimated across 9 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.

3.28
Elizabeth Lotz
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #3 Doubles 14% · published 3.5
3.23
Alexis Hambrick
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.04
Stacy Creel
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.92
Beth Fennel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Abby Thornton
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3
2.69
Tanya Baugh
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.59
Kim Clayton
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.44
Stephonie McCrory
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.34
Danielle Ryan
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.23
Brandi Oliver
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
Megan Dixon
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · 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.

Tanya Baugh + Stephonie McCrory3346% games−6.9% vs expected
Elizabeth Lotz + Alexis Hambrick7652% games−13.9% vs expected
Tanya Baugh + Stacy Creel044 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
Elizabeth Lotz
27W–17L career · 7 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.28
3.5
Alexis Hambrick
22W–18L career · 4 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.23
Stacy Creel
30W–38L career · 2 lines in 2025
36%64%<1%
3.04
3
Beth Fennel
44W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%72%28%
2.92
3
Abby Thornton
2W–4L career · 6 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tanya Baugh
25W–39L career · 6 lines in 2025
7%92%1%
2.69
Kim Clayton
1W–8L career · 3 lines in 2025
>99%<1%<1%
2.59
Stephonie McCrory
6W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
68%32%<1%
2.44
2.5
Danielle Ryan
8W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%89%11%
2.34
2.5
Brandi Oliver
5W–6L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%98%2%
2.23
Megan Dixon
2W–5L career · 6 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.