Teams

Moore/RR/NCC

2026 Adult 18 & Over Spring 2 League · 3.5 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.33 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-05-05vs PTA/Parmentier/HunterSplit 22
L#1 DoublesPatty James / Danielle Patterson vs Morgan Jayaprabhu / Lori Hunter2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#1 SinglesClaire Showmaker vs Helen Pennington0-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesLayna Moore / Katie Peek vs Angie Sikorski / Traci Gatlin6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKarrah Dickeson / Ginger Ford vs Lisa Henry / Treva West5-7, 6-1, 1-0
2026-05-04vs PTA/Parmentier/HunterWon 41
W#1 DoublesLayna Moore / Karrah Dickeson vs Lori Hunter / Traci Gatlin6-4, 6-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesKatie Peek vs Krystal Scott2-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesDanielle Patterson / Taylor Harvey vs Angie Sikorski / Morgan Jayaprabhu6-4, 6-4
L#2 SinglesPatty James vs Helen Pennington0-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesAshley Arnold / Amy Pickelman vs Shanon Patterson / Lisa Henry6-2
2026-04-27vs PTA/Parmentier/HunterWon 31
W#1 DoublesKarrah Dickeson / Danielle Patterson vs Morgan Jayaprabhu / Lori Hunter0-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesLayna Moore / Katie Peek vs Angie Sikorski / Treva West7-5, 6-0
L#2 SinglesClaire Showmaker vs Krystal Scott1-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesPatty James / Taylor Harvey vs Traci Gatlin / Gina Foster6-2, 6-0
2026-04-14vs PTA/Parmentier/HunterLost 14
L#1 DoublesDanielle Patterson / Karrah Dickeson vs Angie Sikorski / Morgan Jayaprabhu7-6, 4-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesPatty James vs Helen Pennington0-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesLayna Moore / Claire Showmaker vs Gina Foster / Shanon Patterson3-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesKatie Peek vs Krystal Scott2-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesAmy Pickelman / Ginger Ford vs Traci Gatlin / Kara Daniel0-6, 2-2
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 3.5 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 3.18 estimated across 6 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.

3.31
Katie Peek
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.22
Karrah Dickeson
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.21
Layna Moore
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.17
Danielle Patterson
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.13
Patty James
usually #2 Singles 25%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.01
Claire Showmaker
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3.5
Amy Pickelman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Ginger Ford
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Taylor Harvey
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
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.

Katie Peek
5W–3L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
Karrah Dickeson
6W–1L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.22
Layna Moore
5W–3L career · 4 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.21
3.5
Danielle Patterson
4W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.17
Patty James
2W–6L career · 4 lines in 2026
17%83%<1%
3.13
3.5
Claire Showmaker
0W–6L career · 3 lines in 2026
46%54%<1%
3.01
3
Amy Pickelman
2W–0L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Ginger Ford
69W–63L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Taylor Harvey
2W–0L career · 2 lines 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.