Teams

MBY- Misner/Jones

2024 B'ham Fall - Adult 18 & Over Weeknight W & M · 4.0 Women - Thursday

13 players · average NTRP 4.12 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-11-02vs Hoover Met - Shirley/FehrWon 10
W#3 DoublesMaggie Misner / Anne Matthews vs Suzette Pflaum / Alejandrina Herrera Fey6-2, 6-3
2023-10-19vs Homewood - HainesWon 10
W#2 DoublesMaggie Misner / Whitney Reidinger vs Eunice Ward / Zandra Leverett4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2023-09-20Won 10
W#3 DoublesMaggie Misner / Megan Jones vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2023-09-14vs Homewood - HainesWon 10
W#3 DoublesMaggie Misner / Kathleen Stallings vs Mary Haines / Caroline Culpepper4-6, 7-5, 1-0
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 standings for 4.0 Women - Thursday 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 3.80 estimated across 12 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.

4.31
Anne Matthews
published 4.5
4.03
Kaira King
published
3.93
Whitney Reidinger
published
3.88
Maggie Misner
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.86
Ellie Adams
published
3.80
Lee Baxter
published
3.78
KC Templeton
published
3.74
Kathleen Stallings
published
3.67
Abbie Kotarski
published 4
3.65
Amber Vaughn
published 4
3.48
Lauren Tanner
published
3.46
Kacy Carroll
published
Kim Douglas
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.

Whitney Reidinger + KC Templeton11759% games+7.3% vs expected
Whitney Reidinger + Lauren Tanner4255% games+4.0% vs expected
Lee Baxter + KC Templeton4156% games+0.7% vs expected
Anne Matthews + Maggie Misner2350% gamesnot enough data
Lee Baxter + Abbie Kotarski224 matchesnot enough data
Anne Matthews + Kathleen Stallings213 matchesnot enough data
Kathleen Stallings + Maggie Misner303 matchesnot enough data
Maggie Misner + Whitney Reidinger213 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.

4.5
Anne Matthews
13W–8L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%9%
4.31
Kaira King
25W–5L career · no lines in 2024
<1%41%59%
4.03
Whitney Reidinger
45W–20L career · no lines in 2024
<1%69%31%
3.93
4
Maggie Misner
74W–33L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%80%20%
3.88
Ellie Adams
4W–5L career · no lines in 2024
1%84%15%
3.86
Lee Baxter
24W–9L career · no lines in 2024
2%91%7%
3.80
KC Templeton
43W–21L career · no lines in 2024
2%92%5%
3.78
Kathleen Stallings
15W–8L career · no lines in 2024
4%93%3%
3.74
4
Abbie Kotarski
13W–11L career · no lines in 2024
12%87%1%
3.67
4
Amber Vaughn
16W–15L career · no lines in 2024
14%85%1%
3.65
Lauren Tanner
27W–11L career · no lines in 2024
57%43%<1%
3.48
Kacy Carroll
5W–9L career · no lines in 2024
62%38%<1%
3.46
Kim Douglas
3W–2L career · no lines in 2024
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.