Teams

Cissell/JB/RPCC

2026 Adult 18 & Over Spring 2 League · 4.0 Women

15 players · average NTRP 3.71 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-04-21vs Inboden/JB/JCCWon 32
W#1 DoublesMollie Vance / Cortni Thomas vs Lori Tyson / Margo Hafner6-3, 6-1
L#1 SinglesMadison Matthews vs Hannah Fulmer0-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCherry Dallas / Ashlee Gill vs LINDSAY TROTTER / Abby Rogers6-7, 2-6
W#2 SinglesHaley Davis vs Maddie Booth6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesAbigail Cissell / Shelley Cissell vs Tabitha Inboden / Sarah Abbott6-1, 6-2
2026-04-13vs Inboden/JB/JCCLost 14
L#1 DoublesBella Seeman / Andrea Seeman vs Mindy Lancaster / Margo Hafner7-5, 3-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesCortni Thomas vs Shannon Crocker6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesShelley Cissell / Cherry Dallas vs Maggie Playter / Sarah Abbott4-6, 3-6
L#2 SinglesPeyton Mullins vs Tabitha Inboden4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesMollie Vance / Stephanie Romero vs Hailey Mitchener / Jenny Baggs6-3, 1-6, 0-1
2026-04-06vs Inboden/JB/JCCWon 41
W#1 DoublesShelley Cissell / Abigail Cissell vs Megan Ragsdale / Shannon Crocker6-4, 6-3
W#1 SinglesBella Seeman vs Abby Rogers7-5, 6-4
L#2 DoublesMollie Vance / Haley Davis vs Hannah Fulmer / Maddie Booth0-6, 3-6
W#2 SinglesCortni Thomas vs Jenny Baggs6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAndrea Seeman / Kaylee Berry vs Lori Tyson / Sarah Abbott6-4, 6-4
2026-03-17vs Inboden/JB/JCCWon 32
L#1 DoublesMadison Matthews / Mollie Vance vs Tabitha Inboden / Lori Tyson7-5, 2-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesCortni Thomas vs LINDSAY TROTTER6-0, 6-4
W#2 DoublesShelley Cissell / Abigail Cissell vs Hailey Mitchener / Margo Hafner4-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#2 SinglesBella Seeman vs Maggie Playter6-1, 7-5
L#3 DoublesCherry Dallas / Ashlee Gill vs Abby Rogers / Hannah Fulmer3-6, 3-6
2026-03-08vs Inboden/JB/JCCWon 32
W#1 DoublesAbigail Cissell / Shelley Cissell vs Margo Hafner / Hailey Mitchener6-4, 6-4
W#1 SinglesBella Seeman vs Maggie Playter6-4, 6-1
L#2 DoublesKaylee Berry / Stephanie Romero vs Lori Tyson / Tabitha Inboden3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 SinglesCortni Thomas vs Heather Eggers6-0, 6-1
L#3 DoublesPeyton Mullins / Mandy Folden vs Megan Ragsdale / Hannah Fulmer1-6, 2-6
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 · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Cissell/JB/RPCC41141123196
2Inboden/JB/JCC14111433244

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 3.48 estimated across 14 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.

3.99
Cortni Thomas
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #2 Singles 40% · published 4
3.90
Bella Seeman
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.89
Abigail Cissell
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.80
Kaylee Berry
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.69
Shelley Cissell
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.54
Mollie Vance
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #4 Doubles 27% · published
3.42
Haley Davis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.36
Cherry Dallas
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.25
Madison Matthews
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #1 Singles 40% · published
3.20
Stephanie Romero
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.19
Ashlee Gill
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.15
Mandy Folden
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.14
Peyton Mullins
usually #2 Singles 25%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.12
Andrea Seeman
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Monica Jansen
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.

Ashlee Gill + Stephanie Romero5657% games+15.9% vs expected
Shelley Cissell + Abigail Cissell12258% games+1.9% vs expected
Cortni Thomas + Abigail Cissell404 matchesnot enough data
Monica Jansen + Shelley Cissell033 matchesnot enough data
Shelley Cissell + Cherry Dallas033 matchesnot enough data
Cherry Dallas + Andrea Seeman123 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
Cortni Thomas
19W–3L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
3.99
4
Bella Seeman
7W–1L career · type S · 4 lines in 2026
<1%77%23%
3.90
4
Abigail Cissell
19W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.89
Kaylee Berry
4W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%93%6%
3.80
Shelley Cissell
19W–19L career · 5 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
3.69
Mollie Vance
25W–5L career · 11 lines in 2026
<1%37%63%
3.54
3.5
Haley Davis
1W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%72%28%
3.42
3.5
Cherry Dallas
21W–16L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%86%14%
3.36
Madison Matthews
9W–12L career · 5 lines in 2026
3%95%3%
3.25
Stephanie Romero
33W–27L career · 6 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
3.20
3.5
Ashlee Gill
22W–15L career · 6 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
3.19
Mandy Folden
15W–22L career · 3 lines in 2026
13%87%<1%
3.15
Peyton Mullins
3W–5L career · 4 lines in 2026
14%86%<1%
3.14
3.5
Andrea Seeman
11W–17L career · 4 lines in 2026
18%82%<1%
3.12
Monica Jansen
11W–16L career · no 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.