Teams

Mangum, Emily

2025 Tri-Level 18 & Over-JXN · Women 2.5, 3.0, 3.5

14 players · average NTRP 2.75 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2025-05-14vs Donaldson, MissyLost 03
L#1 DoublesAshley Scarbrough / Jennifer Vaughn vs Melissa Harmon / Tina Roberts0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesSamantha Smith / Emily Mangum vs Rhonda Hamilton / Joy Cloud4-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesMeredith Delaune / Merry Farris vs Lisa Wheat / Susan Hale1-6, 5-7
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 Women 2.5, 3.0, 3.5 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 2.38 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.

2.67
Jennifer Vaughn
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.61
Samantha Smith
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.51
Jaime van Dan
published
2.44
Elizabeth Bailey
published
2.44
Kym Gore
published
2.43
Mabel Zevallos
published
2.41
Ashley Scarbrough
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.31
Emily Mangum
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.28
2.27
Merry Farris
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Ambrielle Harris
published 2.5
2.13
Meredith Delaune
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.11
Neil Stewart
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.

Merry Farris + Emily Mangum3353% games+15.3% vs expected
Jaime van Dan + Elizabeth Bailey2444% games+0.9% vs expected
Merry Farris + Meredith Delaune134 matchesnot enough data
Sallie Marie Campbell + Emily Mangum123 matchesnot enough data
Merry Farris + Mabel Zevallos213 matchesnot enough data
Merry Farris + Mary Parker Plunkett123 matchesnot enough data
Samantha Smith + Mabel Zevallos033 matchesnot enough data
Samantha Smith + Mary Parker Plunkett033 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.

Jennifer Vaughn
6W–12L career · 1 line in 2025
99%1%<1%
2.67
Samantha Smith
4W–21L career · 1 line in 2025
0%22%78%
2.61
Jaime van Dan
15W–31L career · no lines in 2025
0%47%53%
2.51
Elizabeth Bailey
7W–23L career · no lines in 2025
0%67%33%
2.44
Kym Gore
14W–12L career · no lines in 2025
0%67%33%
2.44
Mabel Zevallos
4W–14L career · no lines in 2025
0%70%30%
2.43
3
Ashley Scarbrough
5W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
75%25%<1%
2.41
Emily Mangum
14W–28L career · 1 line in 2025
0%92%8%
2.31
Mary Parker Plunkett
7W–21L career · no lines in 2025
0%94%6%
2.28
Merry Farris
13W–18L career · 1 line in 2025
0%95%5%
2.27
2.5
Ambrielle Harris
0W–4L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Meredith Delaune
7W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.13
Sallie Marie Campbell
2W–11L career · no lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.11
Neil Stewart
1W–5L career · no lines in 2025
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.