Teams

Queen City Bronze

2026 OH OV SUMMER Career A18&O W Cincinnati · 2026 Summer Career A 18&O 3.0W Cincinnati

7 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 →
Schedule6 played
2026-06-27vs Camargo MagentaWon 21
W#1 DoublesMing Liao / Monica Mazzone vs Crystal Fenster / Jocelyn Dos Anjos6-0, 6-4
L#1 SinglesStephanie Horn vs Sarah Downs6-2, 2-6, 3-4
W#2 DoublesAlicia Peterson / Kate Harrow vs Monica Baker / Amy Reindl6-1, 6-3
2026-06-20Won 20
W#1 DoublesKate Harrow / Ming Liao vs Megan Katt / Meredith Cook6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesAmy Bryce / Amy Campbell vs Marianne Krismer / Heather Hirlinger6-1, 6-3
2026-06-13vs Queen City CopperWon 30
W#1 DoublesSara Shawver / Carolyn Hardin vs Sarah Harnish / Kym Man6-3, 2-6, 5-4
W#1 SinglesAmy Bryce vs Jowana Menifee6-0, 6-2
W#2 DoublesStephanie Horn / Kate Harrow vs Brenda Ratcliffe / Sheila Rankin6-2, 6-0
2026-06-06Won 20
W#1 SinglesSara Shawver vs Andrea Murphy6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesAmy Campbell / Alicia Peterson vs Samantha Smolinski / Margherita Melegari6-3, 6-4
2026-05-30Won 20
W#1 DoublesMonica Mazzone / Ming Liao vs Meredith Cook / Micaela Parson6-1, 6-4
W#1 SinglesAmy Bryce vs Ann Crock6-0, 6-2
2026-05-16vs Queen City CopperWon 20
W#1 DoublesSara Shawver / Alicia Peterson vs Jowana Menifee / Sarah Harnish2-6, 6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJennifer Evans / Stephanie Horn vs Sheila Rankin / Hillary Mueller6-3, 6-0
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 standings3 teams · 2026 Summer Career A 18&O 3.0W Cincinnati
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Queen City Bronze601628108
2Queen City Copper2481022153
3Camargo Magenta2471125175

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 2.92 estimated across 6 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.

3.03
Sara Shawver
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.02
Kate Harrow
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.98
Amy Bryce
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.90
Alicia Peterson
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.83
Stephanie Horn
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
Deb Leonard
published 3
2.75
Monica Mazzone
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
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.

Sara Shawver
4W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%41%59%
3.03
Kate Harrow
4W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%43%57%
3.02
3
Amy Bryce
9W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%56%44%
2.98
3
Alicia Peterson
7W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%78%22%
2.90
Stephanie Horn
16W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%90%10%
2.83
3
Deb Leonard
3W–2L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Monica Mazzone
13W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
3%95%2%
2.75

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.