Teams

Harp/Alma/BG

2025 Adult 18 & Over Spring League 3.0, 3.5, 4.0 · 3.0 Women

10 players · average NTRP 2.75 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-07-15vs Lovell/FS/CMSplit 11
W#2 DoublesAmy Roffine / Stephanie Neidecker vs Maria Lovell / Carrie Medlyn6-4, 6-1
L#3 DoublesEmily Knoll / Lori Forsgren vs Marcela Escobar / Katie Gibbs2-6, 4-6
2025-06-17vs Lovell/FS/CMSplit 11
L#1 DoublesNancy Kremers / Kelly Wingfield vs Maria Lovell / Claire Day6-3, 2-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesAmy Roffine / Stephanie Neidecker vs Jessica Riggins / Carrie Medlyn1-6, 6-1, 1-0
2025-05-13vs Morris/FS/BGLost 13
L#1 DoublesNancy Kremers / Cristy Harp vs Emillie Vick / Carrie Curtis0-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#1 SinglesKelly Wingfield vs Jennifer Jenkins0-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesBlanca Barroso / Wendy Mullens vs Aaron Hasley / Jennifer Baxter1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesStephanie Neidecker / Amy Roffine vs Lexi Morris / Janice Bower6-4, 6-3
2025-05-08vs Gilliam/FS/CMLost 14
W#1 DoublesLori Forsgren / Nancy Kremers vs Melissa Schoenfeld / Brooke Runser6-0, 6-3
L#1 SinglesLaura Pearce vs Glenna Gilliam7-6, 2-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesStephanie Neidecker / Blanca Barroso vs Joanna Ayala / Sara Rahmani1-6, 3-6
L#2 SinglesCristy Harp vs Krystal Boylan2-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesCarrie Moore / Kelly Wingfield vs Alyssa Kroth / Lauren Davidson1-6, 2-6
2025-04-17vs Lovell/FS/CMSplit 22
L#1 DoublesNancy Kremers / Kelly Wingfield vs Kristen Ferguson / Jessica Riggins2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesLori Forsgren / Becke Symonds vs Savannah Lopez / Erin Barker7-5, 6-3
L#2 SinglesCristy Harp vs Hannah Holmes3-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesStephanie Neidecker / Blanca Barroso vs Maria Lovell / Kathy Remerscheid6-7, 6-4, 1-0
2025-04-14vs Gilliam/FS/CMLost 13
L#1 DoublesKelly Wingfield / Nancy Kremers vs Glenna Gilliam / Krystal Boylan5-7, 2-6
L#1 SinglesLaura Pearce vs Lauren Cervantes0-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesCristy Harp / Emma Robertson vs Alyssa Kroth / Melissa Schoenfeld6-4, 6-3
L#3 DoublesWendy Mullens / Stephanie Neidecker vs Sara Rahmani / Joanna Ayala2-6, 3-6
2025-03-13vs Lovell/FS/CMLost 13
L#1 DoublesStephanie Neidecker / Emma Robertson vs Maria Lovell / Carrie Medlyn2-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesNancy Kremers / Kelly Wingfield vs Jessica Riggins / Kathy Remerscheid6-7, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 SinglesCristy Harp vs Hannah Holmes3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesBecke Symonds / Blanca Barroso vs Jacie Hamby / Savannah Lopez4-6, 2-6
2025-02-25vs Morris/FS/BGLost 04
L#1 DoublesBecke Symonds / Kelly Wingfield vs Emillie Vick / Carrie Curtis1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesNancy Kremers / Carrie Moore vs Lexi Morris / Brooke Jackson4-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesLaura Pearce vs Jennifer Jenkins1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesWendy Mullens / Cristy Harp vs Morgan Kremers / Gala Forsgren3-6, 3-6
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 standings for 3.0 Women 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 2.50 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.

2.65
Laura Pearce
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.65
Stephanie Neidecker
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published
2.64
Amy Roffine
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.63
Kelly Wingfield
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #1 Singles 14% · published
2.62
Nancy Kremers
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
2.53
Lori Forsgren
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.47
Cristy Harp
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3
2.42
Blanca Barroso
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.23
Wendy Mullens
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.21
Becke Symonds
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Stephanie Neidecker + Wendy Mullens2348% games+7.9% vs expected
Amy Roffine + Stephanie Neidecker4160% gamesnot enough data
Nancy Kremers + Kelly Wingfield134 matchesnot enough data
Amy Roffine + Lori Forsgren134 matchesnot enough data
Blanca Barroso + Wendy Mullens044 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Neidecker + Cristy Harp123 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.

Laura Pearce
7W–11L career · 3 lines in 2025
14%85%1%
2.65
Stephanie Neidecker
13W–14L career · 7 lines in 2025
14%85%1%
2.65
3
Amy Roffine
10W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
16%84%1%
2.64
Kelly Wingfield
6W–13L career · 7 lines in 2025
18%81%<1%
2.63
Nancy Kremers
15W–29L career · 7 lines in 2025
20%79%<1%
2.62
Lori Forsgren
10W–8L career · 3 lines in 2025
41%59%<1%
2.53
3
Cristy Harp
16W–28L career · 6 lines in 2025
58%42%<1%
2.47
2.5
Blanca Barroso
9W–14L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%72%28%
2.42
Wendy Mullens
15W–21L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%97%3%
2.23
2.5
Becke Symonds
6W–10L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%98%2%
2.21

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.