Teams

WNCA Murray (Brevard)

Combo 18 & Over USTA WNC 2026 · 18+ Women 7.5 Combo Sun

12 players · average NTRP 3.83 / NORTH CAROLINA

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 →
Schedule2 played
2026-08-16vs WNCA Rosenfelt (ARC South)Won 30
W#1 DoublesJennifer Edney / Alaine LeGrand vs Tina Kinard / Susan Cook6-2, 7-5
W#2 DoublesTerri Lowery / Stephanie Nichols vs Rebecca Carchman / Kelly Olesiuk6-2, 2-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAndrea Smith / Casey Blair vs Caroline Anders / Karolina Drozdz4-6, 6-0, 1-0
2026-08-09vs WNCL Maggard (CCA)Won 20
W#2 DoublesAlexandra Murray / Ava Heffner vs Kaitlyn Quinn / Fiona Teague6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesStephanie Nichols / Terri Lowery vs Elaine Dephouse / Paige Scully6-2, 6-3
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 standings4 teams · 18+ Women 7.5 Combo Sun
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WNCA Murray (Brevard)1030221
2WNCL Maggard (CCA)000000
3WNCT Kerr (ARC South)0112533
4WNCA Rosenfelt (ARC South)0103633

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 3.37 estimated across 9 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.

Alaine LeGrand
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
Ava Heffner
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
Casey Blair
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Susanna Saidi
published
3.66
Alexandra Moody
published 4
3.43
Terri Lowery
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.39
Kim McKibbin
published
3.39
Alexandra Murray
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.34
Jennifer Edney
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.22
3.11
Heidi Spradlin
published
3.02
Carolyn Hardin
published 3.5
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.

Jennifer Edney + Mary Eccles Thompson3354% games+2.0% vs expected
Jennifer Edney + Alexandra Murray224 matchesnot enough data
Susanna Saidi + Alexandra Moody134 matchesnot enough data
Alexandra Moody + Alexandra Murray303 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
Alaine LeGrand
4W–2L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
4
Ava Heffner
1W–0L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
4
Casey Blair
1W–0L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Susanna Saidi
19W–28L career · no lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.72
4
Alexandra Moody
21W–22L career · no lines in 2026
12%87%1%
3.66
Terri Lowery
24W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
3.43
Kim McKibbin
5W–1L career · no lines in 2026
<1%78%22%
3.39
3.5
Alexandra Murray
15W–6L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
3.39
Jennifer Edney
8W–13L career · 1 line in 2026
1%87%13%
3.34
Mary Eccles Thompson
7W–11L career · no lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.22
Heidi Spradlin
8W–11L career · no lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.11
3.5
Carolyn Hardin
2W–7L career · no lines in 2026
43%57%<1%
3.02

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.