Teams

RC MOORE

2026 FW Adult 18 & Over League - Ladies · Saturday Ladies 2.5

8 players · average NTRP 2.50 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-04-20vs WAL MIONEWon 21
W#1 DoublesMargaret Harper / Haley Snell vs Barbie McAnalley / Shannon Lee6-4, 6-4
L#1 SinglesJennifer Omana vs Tina Pierce2-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesMaggie Krenek / Anna Barr vs Ana Lucas / Alice Stacey5-7, 7-5, 1-0
2026-04-11vs MCL CANDELARIALost 02
L#1 DoublesKC Holthaus / Anna Barr vs Olivia Delaune / Sierra Evans2-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesHaley Snell vs Dharmishtha Upadhyaya7-5, 3-6, 1-0
2026-03-21vs MCL CANDELARIAWon 21
L#1 DoublesMaggie Krenek / Margaret Harper vs Julie Fox / Dharmishtha Upadhyaya5-7, 0-6
W#1 SinglesHaley Snell vs Paro Norris6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAnna Barr / KC Holthaus vs Sierra Evans / Stephanie Jones6-4, 6-4
2026-03-14vs WAL MIONELost 12
L#1 DoublesMargaret Harper / Maggie Krenek vs Ana Lucas / Shannon Lee2-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesJennifer Omana vs Tina Pierce1-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesTaylor Reynolds / Haley Snell vs Barbie McAnalley / Cindy Gardner6-3, 6-2
2026-02-28vs MCL CANDELARIAWon 21
W#1 DoublesMaggie Krenek / Haley Snell vs Paro Norris / Sierra Evans2-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#1 SinglesJennifer Omana vs Olivia Delaune2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesAnna Barr / Rachel Lang vs Stephanie Jones / Megan Howard3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2026-02-21vs WAL MIONESplit 11
L#1 DoublesAnna Barr / Maggie Krenek vs Ana Lucas / Shannon Lee4-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesHaley Snell vs Barbie McAnalley5-7, 6-4, 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 standings2 teams · Saturday Ladies 2.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MCL CANDELARIA3311717147
2RC MOORE3381024187

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 2.10 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.

2.18
Margaret Harper
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.17
Anna Barr
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 2.5
2.15
Haley Snell
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
2.05
Maggie Krenek
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
1.96
Jennifer Omana
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Jason Moore
published
KC Holthaus
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Rachel Lang
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Anna Barr + Maggie Krenek213 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.

Margaret Harper
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.18
2.5
Anna Barr
4W–2L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.17
2.5
Haley Snell
5W–5L career · 6 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.15
Maggie Krenek
4W–8L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.05
Jennifer Omana
0W–9L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.96
Jason Moore
5W–0L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
KC Holthaus
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Rachel Lang
2W–3L career · 1 line 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.