Teams

Scarborough 4

2026 FALL A18&O WEEKEND · FALL 18&O 3.5 WOMEN Career

16 players · average NTRP 3.00 / OHIO VALLEY

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →

Flight standings for FALL 18&O 3.5 WOMEN Career 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 3.06 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.

3.50
Journey Kissell
published
3.32
3.29
Jeslyn Eskander
published
3.26
Natalie Schoolcraft
published
3.21
Elizabeth Trippier
published
3.17
Kim Manno
published
3.07
Natosha Eskander
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.05
Elena Sanders
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.91
Kimberly Rung
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published
2.89
Carson Isaac
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published 3
2.86
Frandy Huang
published
Amanda Flynn
published 3
2.72
Stacy Chalmers
usually #1 Doubles 55%, also #2 Doubles 46% · published
2.57
Ashley Emmons
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 22% · published 3
Emily Hulse
published
Murray Caraway
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.

Elena Sanders + Elizabeth Trippier12272% games+15.7% vs expected
Natalie Schoolcraft + Stephanie Schoolcraft22265% games+12.5% vs expected
Natosha Eskander + Natalie Schoolcraft4559% games+11.6% vs expected
Elizabeth Trippier + Stephanie Schoolcraft3254% games+11.5% vs expected
Journey Kissell + Jeslyn Eskander7166% games+7.3% vs expected
Elena Sanders + Natalie Schoolcraft4552% games+5.9% vs expected
Kim Manno + Amanda Flynn7552% games+5.1% vs expected
Elena Sanders + Kimberly Rung7364% games+3.7% vs expected
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.

Journey Kissell
22W–17L career · no lines in 2026
<1%49%51%
3.50
Stephanie Schoolcraft
43W–15L career · no lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.32
Jeslyn Eskander
30W–26L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.29
Natalie Schoolcraft
36W–26L career · no lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.26
Elizabeth Trippier
30W–15L career · no lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.21
Kim Manno
43W–36L career · no lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.17
Natosha Eskander
26W–64L career · 5 lines in 2026
32%68%<1%
3.07
Elena Sanders
78W–74L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.05
Kimberly Rung
34W–46L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%75%25%
2.91
3
Carson Isaac
25W–17L career · 10 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
2.89
Frandy Huang
2W–14L career · no lines in 2026
<1%83%16%
2.86
3
Amanda Flynn
24W–33L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Stacy Chalmers
49W–48L career · 11 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
2.72
3
Ashley Emmons
13W–33L career · 8 lines in 2026
31%69%<1%
2.57
Emily Hulse
19W–13L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Murray Caraway
10W–28L career · no 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.