Teams

Ma.Burton18T

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

11 players · average NTRP 3.29 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-06-26vs Je.Komes18T4.0Won 10
W#1 DoublesMaryanna Johnson / Cooper Thornhill vs Emily Spencer / Donna Misa6-4, 6-4
2025-06-24vs Gr.Lamb18TWon 10
W#3 DoublesBonnie Burns / Miriam Waters vs Cooper Tharrington / Rachael Van2-6, 6-4, 1-0
2025-06-12vs Ca.Aden18TWon 10
W#1 DoublesMaryanna Johnson / Savannah Davidsson vs Laura Simson / Meagan Heath6-0, 6-1
2025-06-03vs Ca.Beaird18TSplit 11
W#2 DoublesMaria Burton / Maryanna Johnson vs Dana Aderhold / Carter Grimes6-2, 7-6
L#3 DoublesMiriam Waters / Mary Elizabeth Miller vs Jean Merta / Janis McLaughlin6-7, 2-6
2025-05-29vs Ha.Broglin18TWon 10
W#1 DoublesSavannah Davidsson / Cooper Thornhill vs Michelle Kurtz / Cristine Allison6-2, 7-5
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 2.5-3.0-3.5 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 2.85 estimated across 11 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.

3.50
Stephanie Tracey
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.33
Katherine Bratton
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.33
Cooper Thornhill
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.14
Maryanna Johnson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.93
Anna Dineen
published 3.5
2.72
Bonnie Burns
published 3
2.68
Rachel Hardin
published
2.58
Maria Burton
published
2.53
Miriam Waters
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.38
Lillia Andrews
published
2.17
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.

Cooper Thornhill + Maryanna Johnson224 matchesnot enough data
Miriam Waters + Cooper Thornhill123 matchesnot enough data
Katherine Bratton + Stephanie Tracey303 matchesnot enough data
Maria Burton + Rachel Hardin033 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
Stephanie Tracey
90W–39L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%49%51%
3.50
3.5
Katherine Bratton
51W–33L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%89%10%
3.33
3.5
Cooper Thornhill
75W–34L career · type A · 2 lines in 2025
1%90%10%
3.33
3.5
Maryanna Johnson
24W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
14%86%<1%
3.14
3.5
Anna Dineen
0W–5L career · type S · no lines in 2025
70%30%<1%
2.93
3
Bonnie Burns
2W–6L career · no lines in 2025
5%94%1%
2.72
Rachel Hardin
9W–12L career · no lines in 2025
9%91%1%
2.68
Maria Burton
6W–14L career · no lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
2.58
2.5
Miriam Waters
70W–94L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%42%58%
2.53
Lillia Andrews
1W–4L career · no lines in 2025
82%18%<1%
2.38
Mary Elizabeth Miller
2W–4L career · no lines in 2025
0%99%1%
2.17

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.