Teams

Robinson/Nashville

2026 Adult 18 & Over - Nashville · 3.0 Women

13 players · average NTRP 2.75 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-04-20vs Sengvilay/NashvilleLost 14
L#1 DoublesHayley Robinson / Elizabeth Tipton vs Jennifer Gilkey / Sara Lindsay0-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesAbigail Regan vs Bridgette Cagle6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesCatherine Sinks / Holly Barnhart vs Audrey Spradlin / Katelyn Thorne0-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesRachel Devries vs Maggie Swett3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesRusti Greene / Rebecca Shah vs Hannah Drake / Adrienne Lisoskie0-6, 6-3, 0-1
2026-04-13vs Stephens/NashvilleLost 23
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Levine / Catherine Warfield vs Madison Fair / Courtney Hall6-3, 1-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesAbigail Regan vs Bianca Soma6-4, 6-4
L#2 DoublesRachel Devries / Hayley Robinson vs Monica Kenny / Cynthia Madson3-6, 2-6
W#2 SinglesHuntley Robinson vs Katie Laughinghouse6-1, 6-4
L#3 DoublesRebecca Shah / Rusti Greene vs Natalie Geng / Anne Ammons0-6, 0-6
2026-04-06vs Stamelos/NashvilleLost 23
W#1 DoublesMary Helman / Hillary Howorth vs Rebecca Gilbert / Layla Vartanian6-4, 6-3
L#1 SinglesHuntley Robinson vs Navie Birdwell4-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesAbigail Regan / Hayley Robinson vs Kim Thompson / Deidra Young6-4, 6-3
L#2 SinglesAmy Montgomery vs Genevieve Hazel3-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesHolly Barnhart / Rusti Greene vs Shelly Wade / Ann McClure1-6, 1-6
2026-03-27vs Bowers/NashvilleLost 14
L#1 DoublesHillary Howorth / Hayley Robinson vs Ashley Bryan / Caroline Gannon4-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesAbigail Regan vs Stephanie Mehr6-4, 6-3
L#2 DoublesRusti Greene / Elizabeth Tipton vs Austyn Barnes / Garrett Massey1-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesCatherine Warfield vs Ellie Lawson1-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesRebecca Shah / Holly Barnhart vs Shauna Bowers / JoBeth Currie2-6, 1-6
2026-03-23vs Johnson/DeVane/NashvilleLost 23
L#1 DoublesMary Helman / Hayley Robinson vs Erikka Yurjevich / Sarah Mcgee3-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesHuntley Robinson vs Tracy Aszkler6-4, 6-1
L#2 DoublesHolly Barnhart / Elizabeth Tipton vs Allison Smith / Christina Leadon0-6, 5-7
W#2 SinglesElizabeth Levine vs Katy Ridings4-6, 6-0, 1-0
L#3 DoublesRebecca Shah / Catherine Sinks vs Kaitlin Andrews / Brandy Johnson2-6, 1-6
2026-03-11vs Sengvilay/NashvilleLost 14
L#1 DoublesMary Helman / Huntley Robinson vs Katelyn Reimers / Becky Sengvilay6-7, 7-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesAbigail Regan vs Kate Thompson6-0, 6-0
L#2 DoublesHillary Howorth / Amy Montgomery vs Morgan Johnston / Sara Lindsay6-7, 3-6
L#2 SinglesRachel Devries vs Maggie Swett2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesCatherine Sinks / Rebecca Shah vs Hannah Drake / Aden Hardison2-6, 1-6
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 3.0 Women 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 2.51 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.

2.96
Huntley Robinson
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.91
Abigail Regan
usually #1 Singles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.73
Mary Helman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.70
Holly Barnhart
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.68
Hillary Howorth
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.51
Catherine Warfield
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
2.50
Amy Montgomery
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 2.5
2.47
Hayley Robinson
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
2.42
Rachel Devries
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.16
Catherine Sinks
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
2.02
Rebecca Shah
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.00
Rusti Greene
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Elizabeth Levine
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Hayley Robinson + Hillary Howorth3357% games+12.5% vs expected
Rebecca Shah + Rusti Greene0627% gamesnot enough data
Abigail Regan + Hayley Robinson314 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.

Huntley Robinson
4W–3L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%61%39%
2.96
3
Abigail Regan
17W–6L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
2.91
Mary Helman
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
2.73
Holly Barnhart
1W–4L career · 4 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
2.70
Hillary Howorth
8W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%10%90%
2.68
3
Catherine Warfield
4W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
47%53%<1%
2.51
2.5
Amy Montgomery
3W–2L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
0%49%51%
2.50
Hayley Robinson
9W–17L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%58%42%
2.47
Rachel Devries
5W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%73%27%
2.42
2.5
Catherine Sinks
1W–6L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.16
Rebecca Shah
0W–15L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.02
Rusti Greene
0W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.00
Elizabeth Levine
1W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
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.