Teams

Ackerman/18/5.5/CWN/CP

2026 NO Southern Combo 18 & Over - Women Night · 5.5 NO (18&O) Women Night

10 players · average NTRP 2.50 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 upcoming · 2 played
Sep 15 7:00 PM
City Park Tennis Center
Sep 21 7:00 PM
City Park Tennis Center
Sep 30 7:00 PM
City Park Tennis Center
Oct 6 7:00 PM
City Park Tennis Center
Oct 14 7:00 PM
City Park Tennis Center
Oct 19 7:00 PM
City Park Tennis Center
2026-08-31vs Lewis/18/5.5/CWN/XULost 12
W#1 DoublesEmily Eustis / Sarah Malone vs Ashley Neumann / Taryn Brown6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesSarah MacCurdy / Jazmin Herrera vs Chana Lewis / Maria Landry6-7, 3-6
L#3 DoublesElizabeth Hyman / Jill Maumus vs Jennifer Toups / Chenoa Hill0-6, 5-7
2026-08-26vs Dean/18/5.5/CWN/CPSplit 11
L#1 DoublesJazmin Herrera / Sarah MacCurdy vs Chantana Dean / Angela Hennessey0-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesEmily Eustis / Dina Mcevoy vs Kathryn Valentino / Lauren Owen6-0, 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 standings10 teams · 5.5 NO (18&O) Women Night
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Dadlez/18/5.5/CWN/CP000000
2Perino/18/5.5/CWN/CP000000
3Slaton-Devall/18/5.5/CWN/CP000000
4Nickels/18/5.5/CWN/CP000000
5Oest-Larsen/18/5.5/CWN/MCC000000
6Berniard/18/5.5/CWN/CP000000
7Ackerman/18/5.5/CWN/CP000000
8Lewis/18/5.5/CWN/XU000000
9Ferraro/Held/18/5.5/CWN/CP000000
10Dean/18/5.5/CWN/CP000000

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 2.35 estimated across 10 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.

2.62
Emily Eustis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.61
Sara Reardon
published
2.57
Dina Mcevoy
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.48
Rachael Kansas
published
2.37
Jazmin Herrera
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.35
Sarah Malone
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.23
Sarah MacCurdy
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.18
Elizabeth Hyman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.12
Laura Toras
published
2.00
Jill Maumus
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Sarah MacCurdy + Jazmin Herrera0633% games−8.4% vs expected
Emily Eustis + Dina Mcevoy303 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.

2.5
Emily Eustis
7W–0L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
0%17%83%
2.62
Sara Reardon
22W–16L career · no lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
2.61
2.5
Dina Mcevoy
7W–0L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
0%29%71%
2.57
Rachael Kansas
15W–18L career · no lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
2.48
Jazmin Herrera
15W–27L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%83%17%
2.37
Sarah Malone
31W–29L career · 1 line in 2026
0%88%12%
2.35
Sarah MacCurdy
13W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%98%2%
2.23
2.5
Elizabeth Hyman
6W–17L career · 1 line in 2026
0%99%1%
2.18
Laura Toras
5W–20L career · no lines in 2026
>99%<1%0%
2.12
Jill Maumus
7W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.00

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.