Teams

Lagoon Sharp- 3.0/18 Mixed

2025 · 2026 Fall USTA 18&Over Mixed Doubles League-Montgomery

14 players · average NTRP 3.12 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-11-09Won 10
W#3 DoublesHolly Sharp / Robert Black vs John Cannady / Morgan Foxworth6-3, 6-2
2025-11-02Lost 02
L#2 DoublesMurray Fail / Deborah Long vs DEBRA SLEDGE / John Cannady2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesGina Sellers / Robert Black vs LaVonda Daniels / Wesley Robinson1-6, 0-6
2025-10-05Lost 01
L#1 DoublesMolly Killingsworth / Murray Fail vs Habib Rehman / Adrienne Griffin6-3, 2-6, 0-1
2025-09-28Lost 01
L#3 DoublesDeborah Long / Robert Black vs Cameron Espy / Jelani Moore1-6, 4-6
2025-09-21Won 10
W#3 DoublesRobert Black / Angela Hampton vs LaVonda Daniels / Alexander Shipp6-1, 4-6, 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 standings1 teams · 2026 Fall USTA 18&Over Mixed Doubles League-Montgomery
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Lagoon Sharp- 3.0/18 Mixed249921154

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 3.06 estimated across 13 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.

3.45
Antonio Echols
usually #1 Singles 36%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published 3.5
3.41
Kim McDonald
usually #2 Doubles 54%, also #1 Doubles 31% · published
3.38
Molly Killingsworth
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #3 Doubles 19% · published
3.32
Holly Sharp
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.25
Jonathan Tuckwell
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.23
Angela Hampton
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
3.07
Viktor Perovic
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.06
Miriam Scharf
usually #1 Doubles 53%, also #2 Doubles 32% · published
2.93
Robert Black
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.84
Carla Rush
usually #2 Doubles 61%, also #3 Doubles 28% · published 3
2.83
Lindsey McDonald
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Deborah Long
published 3
2.62
Murray Fail
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.43
Gina Sellers
usually #3 Doubles 70%, also #2 Doubles 17% · 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.

Holly Sharp + Molly Killingsworth5369% games+7.8% vs expected
Miriam Scharf + Antonio Echols3356% games+4.7% vs expected
Miriam Scharf + Molly Killingsworth9358% games−5.0% vs expected
Gina Sellers + Kim McDonald1442% gamesnot enough data
Angela Hampton + Holly Sharp5068% gamesnot enough data
Miriam Scharf + Holly Sharp224 matchesnot enough data
Kim McDonald + Lindsey McDonald123 matchesnot enough data
Carla Rush + Holly Sharp213 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.

3.5
Antonio Echols
16W–12L career · 11 lines in 2026
<1%64%36%
3.45
Kim McDonald
23W–20L career · 13 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.41
Molly Killingsworth
52W–32L career · 16 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.38
Holly Sharp
63W–29L career · 27 lines in 2026
1%89%9%
3.32
Jonathan Tuckwell
20W–12L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%3%97%
3.25
3
Angela Hampton
32W–19L career · 16 lines in 2026
<1%5%95%
3.23
Viktor Perovic
18W–22L career · 12 lines in 2026
<1%31%69%
3.07
Miriam Scharf
24W–19L career · 19 lines in 2026
34%65%<1%
3.06
Robert Black
13W–9L career · 4 lines in 2026
69%31%<1%
2.93
3
Carla Rush
26W–41L career · 18 lines in 2026
1%87%13%
2.84
Lindsey McDonald
13W–11L career · 9 lines in 2026
1%87%12%
2.83
3
Deborah Long
3W–4L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Murray Fail
7W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
19%80%<1%
2.62
Gina Sellers
23W–48L career · 23 lines in 2026
70%30%<1%
2.43

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.