Teams

The Wright Team

2026 Winter Blast Doubles · Women 2.5

5 players · average NTRP 2.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2026-02-11vs CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesCarrie Neal / Jessica Gibney vs Laura Lever / Lori Wilson6-3, 6-3
2026-01-23vs CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesDeborah Cashion / Blair Scheepers vs Lori Sadowski / Lori Wilson4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2026-01-13vs CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesMollyrose Wright / Jessica Gibney vs Laura Lever / Lori Sadowski6-2, 6-4
2026-01-06vs CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesJessica Gibney / Deborah Cashion vs Tammy Brindle / Lori Wilson6-3, 6-4
2026-01-04vs CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesBlair Scheepers / Carrie Neal vs Laura Lever / Lori Wilson6-3, 7-5
2025-12-14vs CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesMollyrose Wright / Blair Scheepers vs Tammy Brindle / Lori Sadowski6-1, 6-2
2025-12-12vs CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesDeborah Cashion / Carrie Neal vs Laura Lever / Tammy Brindle6-3, 6-1
2025-12-07vs CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesBlair Scheepers / Jessica Gibney vs Lori Sadowski / Lori Wilson6-3, 6-1
2025-11-17vs CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesMollyrose Wright / Carrie Neal vs Laura Lever / Lori Sadowski6-3, 6-2
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 standings2 teams · Women 2.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1The Wright Team9090152
2CCC090918108

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 2.42 estimated across 5 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.

2.65
Blair Scheepers
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.54
Carrie Neal
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.50
Jessica Gibney
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.38
Mollyrose Wright
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.01
Deborah Cashion
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Mollyrose Wright + Carrie Neal5067% games+18.5% vs expected
Mollyrose Wright + Blair Scheepers15658% games+6.0% vs expected
Deborah Cashion + Blair Scheepers6741% games−4.2% vs expected
Deborah Cashion + Mollyrose Wright1837% games−5.3% vs expected
Jessica Gibney + Blair Scheepers314 matchesnot enough data
Blair Scheepers + Carrie Neal314 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.

2.5
Blair Scheepers
58W–51L career · 7 lines in 2026
0%15%85%
2.65
2.5
Carrie Neal
17W–6L career · type S · 4 lines in 2026
0%38%62%
2.54
Jessica Gibney
14W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%51%49%
2.50
2.5
Mollyrose Wright
50W–75L career · 6 lines in 2026
0%80%20%
2.38
2.5
Deborah Cashion
35W–136L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.01

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.