Teams

Arrighi/18/Div2/WD/BRCC

2025 BR Tri-Level 18 & Over - Women Day · 4.0,3.5,3.0 BR (18&O) Women Day

15 players · average NTRP 3.12 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-07-23vs Silvey/18/Div2/WD/BOCLost 02
L#1 DoublesKaleigh Porcelli / Tammy Noonan vs Courtney McGraw / Andree Padial2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesCarter Borman / Jennifer Maltbie vs Calli Sivils / Katherine Kellum0-6, 2-6
2025-07-09vs Day/18/Div2/WD/CCLWon 21
L#1 DoublesSarah Uhl / Mary Barham vs Heidi Thompson / Allison Rovira1-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesJamie Lewis / Kathryn Baker vs Alletia Sellers / Jessica Cuba7-5, 6-1
W#3 DoublesCarly Whatley / Stacey Fruge vs Nicole DeMoss / Laurie Ginn6-3, 6-0
2025-06-25vs Silvey/18/Div2/WD/BOCLost 03
L#1 DoublesKaleigh Porcelli / Rebecca Harrod vs Amanda Silvey / Andree Padial6-7, 6-7
L#2 DoublesTerry Parker / Kathryn Baker vs Claesi Mccrary / Liz McCarthy7-6, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesCarter Borman / Caroline Taylor vs Jill Kindler / Anna Price3-6, 1-6
2025-06-18vs Day/18/Div2/WD/CCLWon 30
W#1 DoublesKaleigh Porcelli / Tammy Noonan vs Becky Davis / Heidi Thompson6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesMary Barham / Rebecca Harrod vs Alletia Sellers / Tricia Bruno7-6, 7-6
W#3 DoublesLeigh Beth Arrighi / Carter Borman vs Annie Brock / Nicole DeMoss6-2, 6-1
2025-06-11vs Spencer/18/Div1/WD/BRECLost 01
L#2 DoublesCarly Whatley / Katie Williams vs Denise Pickering / Julie LeBlanc6-2, 2-6, 0-1
2025-06-04vs Silvey/18/Div2/WD/BOCWon 21
L#1 DoublesSarah Uhl / Tammy Noonan vs Cindy Barksdale / Andree Padial7-5, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMary Barham / Jamie Lewis vs Heidi Smith / Heather Jayson4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCarly Whatley / Katie Williams vs Rachelle Trahan / Mary Raborn6-1, 7-5
2025-05-25vs Day/18/Div2/WD/CCLWon 21
W#1 DoublesKaleigh Porcelli / Sarah Uhl vs Tina Moore / Becky Davis6-3, 7-6
W#2 DoublesKathryn Baker / Jamie Lewis vs Ellen Pino / Jessica Cuba6-3, 6-3
L#3 DoublesJennifer Maltbie / Jennifer Yale vs Candace Mula / Nicole DeMoss3-6, 6-3, 0-1
2025-05-21vs Kern/18/Div1/WD/UCLost 01
L#2 DoublesCarly Whatley / Emily Parks vs Jena Vavasseur / Megan Trahant6-7, 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 4.0,3.5,3.0 BR (18&O) Women Day 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 3.20 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.

4.03
Sarah Uhl
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.93
Tammy Noonan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.79
Kathryn Baker
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.78
Mary Barham
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.63
Rebecca Harrod
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.95
Carly Whatley
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.91
Brooke Wood
published 3.5
2.81
Leigh Beth Arrighi
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.78
Jennifer Maltbie
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Caroline Taylor
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.70
Stacey Fruge
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.62
Carter Borman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.53
Kasey Cangelosi
published
Jennifer Yale
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Kaleigh Porcelli
usually #1 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.

Rebecca Harrod + Kaleigh Porcelli3358% gamesnot enough data
Sarah Uhl + Mary Barham224 matchesnot enough data
Carter Borman + Leigh Beth Arrighi314 matchesnot enough data
Kasey Cangelosi + Jennifer Yale123 matchesnot enough data
Rebecca Harrod + Mary Barham303 matchesnot enough data
Carter Borman + Jennifer Maltbie123 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.

Sarah Uhl
22W–7L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%40%60%
4.03
Tammy Noonan
47W–20L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%69%31%
3.93
Kathryn Baker
44W–11L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.79
Mary Barham
21W–11L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.78
Rebecca Harrod
9W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
17%82%<1%
3.63
3
Carly Whatley
22W–14L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%64%36%
2.95
3.5
Brooke Wood
6W–8L career · no lines in 2025
75%25%<1%
2.91
Leigh Beth Arrighi
6W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
1%90%9%
2.81
Jennifer Maltbie
5W–22L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
2.78
3
Caroline Taylor
1W–3L career · type S · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Stacey Fruge
6W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
8%91%2%
2.70
3
Carter Borman
5W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
2.62
Kasey Cangelosi
1W–4L career · no lines in 2025
41%59%<1%
2.53
Jennifer Yale
2W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Kaleigh Porcelli
6W–5L career · 4 lines in 2025
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.