Teams

Ma.Harber18S

2026 Capital Singles 18 & Over · 2.5 Women

7 players · average NTRP 2.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-07-13vs Ma.Ross18SLost 03
L#1 SinglesAllison Mills vs Emily Funderburk2-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesMaggie Hicks vs Elizabeth Robinson6-7, 1-6
L#3 SinglesMaggie Harber vs CarolAnn Wiggs1-6, 3-6
2026-07-07vs Kh.Lemon18SWon 20
W#1 SinglesAlexa Bowser vs Khelsey Lemon6-1, 6-2
W#3 SinglesStacy Newton vs Farrah Scales6-1, 6-0
2026-06-30vs Li.Singler18SWon 30
W#1 SinglesAllison Mills vs Kelly Norman6-0, 6-1
W#2 SinglesAlexa Bowser vs Leah Beatty6-0, 6-1
W#3 SinglesJessica Vickers vs Katie Brummer6-0, 6-3
2026-06-29vs Je.Tyndall18SSplit 11
L#1 SinglesJessica Vickers vs Molly Chaffee6-7, 2-6
W#2 SinglesMelinda Daly vs Sarah Ammirati7-5, 6-1
2026-06-15vs Je.Hastie18SWon 21
W#1 SinglesMelinda Daly vs Jeanna Hastie6-1, 7-5
L#2 SinglesAllison Mills vs Molly DeAngelo7-6, 1-6, 0-1
W#3 SinglesMaggie Harber vs Kristina Faulkner6-4, 6-2
2026-06-08vs Em.Butler18SWon 20
W#2 SinglesStacy Newton vs Lisa Pakela6-1, 6-1
W#3 SinglesMelinda Daly vs Emma Gerden6-3, 6-0
2026-06-01vs Br.Welborn18SWon 30
W#1 SinglesAlexa Bowser vs Allison Bubar6-3, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 SinglesMaggie Hicks vs Erin Lewis6-1, 6-3
W#3 SinglesMaggie Harber vs Jacqui Liss6-4, 6-4
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 standings15 teams · 2.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Ca.Hurst18S802314133
2Ma.Ross18S611749112
3Ma.Harber18S6116512135
4Sh.Bulkowski18S6217718174
5Je.Hastie18S5214717151
6He.Suke18S44121225192
7Ra.Van18S44101429223
8Kh.Lemon18S34111022177
9Je.Tyndall18S34101124187
10Br.Welborn18S2571428193
11De.Farmer18S2.52561530218
12Em.Butler18S2551634226
13Mo.Lewis18S2661836238
14Su.Potter18S1671429208
15Li.Singler18S1621939241

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 2.34 estimated across 7 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.

2.66
Alexa Bowser
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 2.5
2.52
Maggie Hicks
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
2.38
Melinda Daly
usually #2 Singles 33%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
2.28
Allison Mills
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 2.5
2.26
Maggie Harber
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
2.23
Stacy Newton
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
2.08
Jessica Vickers
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 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.

2.5
Alexa Bowser
4W–0L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
0%13%87%
2.66
Maggie Hicks
9W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%45%55%
2.52
Melinda Daly
7W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%80%20%
2.38
2.5
Allison Mills
5W–6L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
0%94%6%
2.28
Maggie Harber
4W–8L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%96%4%
2.26
Stacy Newton
6W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%97%3%
2.23
Jessica Vickers
7W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.08

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.