Teams

EBattle (Sardis)

2025 Singles 18 & Over League · 18 & Over Singles 3.5 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-08-01vs BHahn (Carmel)Won 20
W#1 SinglesMary Laird Garrison vs Beth Hahn6-3, 6-1
W#2 SinglesKatie Ferry vs Jill Halverstam7-5, 6-1
2025-07-25vs ASchmitt (OPRC)Won 21
L#1 SinglesKatie Ferry vs Amber Nee6-7, 3-6
W#2 SinglesKendra Treece vs Anne Schmitt6-0, 7-5
W#3 SinglesLaura Warden vs Leah Hackworth6-1, 6-3
2025-07-11vs BHahn (Carmel)Won 30
W#1 SinglesMary Laird Garrison vs Elizabeth Workman6-4, 6-3
W#2 SinglesDina Carey vs Marcie Elaasar6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 SinglesLaura Warden vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2025-06-29vs ASchmitt (OPRC)Won 20
W#1 SinglesKimberly Battle vs Kathy Spence6-2, 6-2
W#2 SinglesLaura Warden vs Leah Hackworth6-2, 6-1
2025-06-25vs BHahn (Carmel)Won 20
W#1 SinglesMary Laird Garrison vs Beth Hahn6-1, 6-1
W#2 SinglesKendra Treece vs Elizabeth Workman6-4, 6-3
2025-06-06vs ASchmitt (OPRC)Won 21
L#1 SinglesKimberly Battle vs Amber Nee4-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesDina Carey vs Sara Holderness6-1, 6-0
W#3 SinglesKatie Ferry vs Anne Schmitt6-1, 6-0
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 standings11 teams · 18 & Over Singles 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1LPinzon/LDifazio (Life Time)7119514156
2EKennard (Park Road)7117715155
3EBattle (Sardis)601539110
4KGissy (Queens)44111327211
5BBaker (Jeff Adams)44111329199
6KHarborne (Piper Glen)3581636238
7BHahn (Carmel)2461225171
8MGross (Park Road)2591225191
9ASchmitt (OPRC)1561226191
10KMoore (Queens)1641734222
11APurmort (Queens)1781635242

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 3.40 estimated across 8 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.

3.70
Mary Laird Garrison
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.53
Kimberly Battle
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.47
Kendra Treece
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.39
Emily Battle
published 3.5
3.34
Laura Warden
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.33
Dina Carey
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.29
Katie Ferry
usually #3 Singles 33%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.15
Kate Johnson
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.

Kate Johnson + Kimberly Battle5353% games+3.4% vs expected
Kendra Treece + Dina Carey213 matchesnot enough data
Dina Carey + Mary Laird Garrison303 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.

Mary Laird Garrison
60W–12L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%7%93%
3.70
Kimberly Battle
46W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%41%59%
3.53
3.5
Kendra Treece
62W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%58%42%
3.47
3.5
Emily Battle
1W–2L career · type A · no lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
3.39
3.5
Laura Warden
47W–15L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%88%11%
3.34
3.5
Dina Carey
40W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.33
Katie Ferry
28W–13L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.29
Kate Johnson
33W–12L career · no lines in 2025
12%88%<1%
3.15

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.