Teams

DO - Brown

2026 Dothan USTA Tri-Level 40 & Over · Tri-Level Women 4.5, 4.0, 3.5

12 players · average NTRP 3.88 / ALABAMA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
L#2 DoublesAmy Brown / Natacha Phillips vs Jamie Shertzer / Amy Salmon5-7, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesAngie Mcdaniel / Laura Othax vs Carlene Sessions / Vicki Bitney6-4, 7-6
L#1 DoublesAngie Mcdaniel / Laura Othax vs Carie Crowley / Elizabeth Odom5-7, 2-6
W#2 DoublesMikaela McManus / Ashley Edmonds vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesTricia Hafdahl / Alexis Ernst vs Jamie Shertzer / Amy Salmon6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAmy Brown / Natacha Phillips vs Leigh Cooper / Lisa Howard7-5
W#3 DoublesAlexis Ernst / Marsha Waller vs Veleta Watson / Martha Collins6-2, 6-1
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 · Tri-Level Women 4.5, 4.0, 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1DO - Brown3072446
2WTC - Crowley 40 & Over TriLevel 4.5,4.0,3.5032715104

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 3.66 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.

4.32
Alexis Ernst
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.06
Tricia Hafdahl
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.91
Mikaela McManus
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.86
Laura Othax
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.68
Natacha Phillips
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.53
Meg Castleberry
published
3.48
Ashley Edmonds
published 4
3.42
Mary Brown
published
3.21
Carol Block
published 3.5
3.16
Angie Mcdaniel
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Kenna Head
published
Marsha Waller
usually #3 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.

Natacha Phillips + Ashley Edmonds303 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.

4.5
Alexis Ernst
5W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%91%9%
4.32
Tricia Hafdahl
8W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
32%67%<1%
4.06
Mikaela McManus
81W–44L career · 1 line in 2026
75%25%<1%
3.91
Laura Othax
2W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
86%14%<1%
3.86
Natacha Phillips
134W–77L career · 2 lines in 2026
8%91%1%
3.68
Meg Castleberry
25W–8L career · no lines in 2026
<1%40%60%
3.53
4
Ashley Edmonds
17W–9L career · no lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
3.48
Mary Brown
2W–6L career · no lines in 2026
73%27%<1%
3.42
3.5
Carol Block
9W–7L career · no lines in 2026
5%94%1%
3.21
3.5
Angie Mcdaniel
14W–31L career · 2 lines in 2026
11%88%<1%
3.16
Kenna Head
2W–0L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Marsha Waller
4W–2L 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.