← Search

Janet Jensen

Add to scout listFree account. Monday email when they play.
Tucson, AZ
3.5C year-end 2025
i
Computer — generated by the USTA algorithm from match play
64 matches · 43W–21L · seasons 2019–2026
Match history64 matches
L
2026-03-23 · Desert Gems · #1 Doubles · 7.0 · with Justine Miller
loading the estimate
0-6, 6-3, 0-1
W
2026-03-09 · Desert Gems · #1 Doubles · 7.0 · with Justine Miller
loading the estimate
6-3, 6-2
L
2026-02-23 · Desert Gems · #1 Doubles · 7.0 · with Justine Miller
loading the estimate
3-6, 6-3, 0-1
W
2026-02-16 · Desert Gems · #1 Doubles · 7.0 · with Justine Miller
loading the estimate
4-6, 6-0, 1-0
L
2026-01-26 · Desert Gems · #2 Doubles · 7.0 · with Denise Phillips
loading the estimate
6-2, 1-6, 0-1
L
2025-04-28 · #3 Doubles · 7.0 · with Laura Ingold
no estimate for this season
i
Our model did not follow this player through that season: none of their matches that season carried an individual NTRP level (55 & Over and combo leagues are rated on combined levels), so it had nothing to start from. The match still counts toward the USTA rating.
6-7, 4-6
L
2025-04-21 · #2 Doubles · 7.0 · with Laura Ingold
no estimate for this season
i
Our model did not follow this player through that season: none of their matches that season carried an individual NTRP level (55 & Over and combo leagues are rated on combined levels), so it had nothing to start from. The match still counts toward the USTA rating.
5-7, 5-7
W
2025-03-10 · #2 Doubles · 7.0 · with Laura Ingold
no estimate for this season
i
Our model did not follow this player through that season: none of their matches that season carried an individual NTRP level (55 & Over and combo leagues are rated on combined levels), so it had nothing to start from. The match still counts toward the USTA rating.
6-4, 6-2
W
2025-02-17 · #1 Doubles · 7.0 · with Justine Miller
no estimate for this season
i
Our model did not follow this player through that season: none of their matches that season carried an individual NTRP level (55 & Over and combo leagues are rated on combined levels), so it had nothing to start from. The match still counts toward the USTA rating.
6-2, 7-5
L
2025-01-27 · #1 Doubles · 7.0 · with Kathern Kortus
no estimate for this season
i
Our model did not follow this player through that season: none of their matches that season carried an individual NTRP level (55 & Over and combo leagues are rated on combined levels), so it had nothing to start from. The match still counts toward the USTA rating.
6-3, 4-6, 0-1
L
2024-11-18 · #2 Doubles · 7.0 · with Kathern Kortus
loading the estimate
1-6, 3-6
W
2024-04-22 · #2 Doubles · 7.0 · with Kathern Kortus
no estimate for this season
i
Our model did not follow this player through that season: none of their matches that season carried an individual NTRP level (55 & Over and combo leagues are rated on combined levels), so it had nothing to start from. The match still counts toward the USTA rating.
6-2, 1-6, 1-0
Where you rank locallyagainst everyone at your level
Teams6 teams · 2019–2026
Over timerating by season, and how you rank
By level4 levels played
3.5
83.3%
5W–1L · 60% of games
7.0
70.8%
34W–14L · 56.2% of games
8.0
25%
2W–6L · 39.6% of games
8.0mixed
2W–0L
not enough matches yet

Games won matters more than matches won — NTRP adjusts on margins.

By lineusually #1 Doubles, 66% of the time
#1 Doubles
66%
42 matches
#3 Doubles
19%
12 matches
#2 Doubles
16%
10 matches

How often, across every team and every match we hold — including ones that do not count toward a rating. Advanced stats has a court-position table too, and it answers a different question: how well you do there, over matches that count. A team’s own page shows how that one team uses you.

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.

Start where you are. Use what you have. Do what you can.
Arthur Ashe