Teams

Lakewood/Diaz-Dix W4.0

2025 DALLAS TENNIS 18 & Over ADULT S · S W. Thursday League

25 players · average NTRP 3.62 / TEXAS

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 →
Schedule8 played
2025-06-26vs Royal Oaks/Munir W4.0Lost 12
W#1 DoublesKari Prine / Kerri Johnson vs Kelsey Wiley / Leslie Sorrels6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesKristi Bare vs Andrea Bradford6-7, 3-6
L#2 DoublesAlexandra Klitsch / Karen Zotos vs Christy Abbott / Tami Skorpil0-6, 2-6
2025-06-19Lost 02
L#1 DoublesKristi Bare / Karen Zotos vs Marnie Pizzitola / Melissa Reilly4-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesKari Hernandez / Jennifer Campiti vs Jo Ann Compton / Laura Flores1-6, 2-6
2025-06-05vs Huffhines/Ethington W4.0Lost 01
L#1 DoublesKerri Johnson / Elizabeth Lamberson vs Melissa Sipes / Jill Nail4-6, 4-6
2025-05-29vs McKinney/Jacobs-Chapman W4.0Lost 02
L#1 DoublesKristi Bare / Elizabeth Lamberson vs Tanya Clay / Lachrista Whatley2-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesAlexandra Klitsch / Sally Stephenson vs Amy Farrell / Sarah Haskins2-6, 0-6
2025-05-22vs The Nelson/Wood W4.0Lost 02
L#1 DoublesWhitney Huffman / Sally Stephenson vs Blaine Eschenburg / Amy Hefner2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJulie Davidson / Kari Hernandez vs Elizabeth Smith / Billur Alley2-6, 1-6
2025-05-15Lost 01
L#1 DoublesKaren Motes / Kari Prine vs Jill McGill / Lindsay Reeves2-6, 4-6
2025-05-14Won 21
W#1 DoublesKaren Motes / Martha Wanstrath vs Brittani Yoo / Elizabeth Nevelow6-2, 2-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKerri Johnson / Julie Davidson vs Kristen Lampe / Julie Murray0-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesSara Straley / Karen Zotos vs Enya He / Melany White6-2, 3-6, 1-0
2025-05-08vs SMU/Park W4.0Lost 02
L#1 DoublesKari Prine / Whitney Huffman vs Wendi Kaplan / Elizabeth Vice3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesSally Stephenson / Jennifer Campiti vs Shirley Crow / Ellen Beren6-3, 1-6, 0-1
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 standings27 teams · S W. Thursday League
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1High Point/Soldan-Dove W4.080291128275
2Greenhill/Newberg-Schonwald W4.07132822263
3Lakes/Buckalew-Criswell W4.071271336339
4Garland/Smith-Bradley W4.071241637325
5Colleyville Park/Coffindaffer W4.0 (F2025 WC)62281232300
6Greenhill/Nevelow W4.062241638329
7Samuell Grand/McGill-Beirute W4.062241638329
8High Point/Davis-Jenkins W4.062221842364
9Royal Oaks/Munir W4.062202045343
10Samuell Grand/Musick-Thornton W4.053291127299
11Samuell Grand/Roos-Oliver W4.053241636335
12Oak Creek/Jackson-Trousil W4.053231739349
13Canyon Creek/Kramer-Thomas W4.053221839325
14SMU/Park W4.044241640335
15McKinney/Jacobs-Chapman W4.044221844361
16DCC/Beecherl W4.044211945361
17DAC/Fellman-Jolly W4.035211947391
18Huffhines/Ethington W4.035172353399
19DAC/Moore-Carothers W4.035132760409
20Chandlers Landing/Owenby W4.026172353383
21Gleneagles/Shukis-Lofgren W4.026142653385
22Stonebriar/Woodson W4.026132756396
23McKinney/Cady W4.017152553386
24The Nelson/Wood W4.017152554384
25RGAC/Hill W4.008112959410
26Lakewood/Diaz-Dix W4.00863472452
27T bar M/Dodgen-LaRosen W4.00833776466

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 3.26 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.

Elizabeth Lamberson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.53
Alex Fergus
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.48
Sara Straley
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
3.42
Sloan Dix
usually #2 Doubles 63%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.40
Kate Walters
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.35
Alexandra Klitsch
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Singles 17% · published 3.5
3.35
Whitney Huffman
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.31
Lindsey Diaz
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Brooke McGonigle
usually #3 Doubles 29%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.18
Mandy Stewart
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.09
Lynn Robertson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.06
Jennifer Campiti
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.99
Shannon Carr
usually #1 Singles 25%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.98
Sarah Ringwald
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Julie Davidson
published
Karen Motes
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Karen Zotos
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Kari Hernandez
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Kari Prine
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Kerri Johnson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Kimberly Warren
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Kristi Bare
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
Martha Wanstrath
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Michelle Early
published
Sally Stephenson
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · 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.

Kate Walters + Sloan Dix9653% games+2.8% vs expected
Whitney Huffman + Sara Straley134 matchesnot enough data
Karen Motes + Elizabeth Lamberson123 matchesnot enough data
Lindsey Diaz + Sloan Dix213 matchesnot enough data
Sloan Dix + Whitney Huffman123 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.

4
Elizabeth Lamberson
3W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Alex Fergus
22W–8L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%41%59%
3.53
Sara Straley
21W–6L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%55%45%
3.48
Sloan Dix
18W–16L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
3.42
Kate Walters
15W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%78%21%
3.40
3.5
Alexandra Klitsch
13W–15L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%86%13%
3.35
Whitney Huffman
14W–24L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%86%13%
3.35
Lindsey Diaz
13W–17L career · 8 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Brooke McGonigle
5W–7L career · 7 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mandy Stewart
8W–16L career · 6 lines in 2025
9%91%1%
3.18
Lynn Robertson
1W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
25%75%<1%
3.09
Jennifer Campiti
5W–15L career · 6 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.06
Shannon Carr
3W–13L career · 4 lines in 2025
52%48%<1%
2.99
Sarah Ringwald
6W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
55%45%<1%
2.98
Julie Davidson
0W–6L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Karen Motes
6W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Karen Zotos
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kari Hernandez
0W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kari Prine
5W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kerri Johnson
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kimberly Warren
1W–7L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kristi Bare
0W–13L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Martha Wanstrath
1W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Michelle Early
6W–2L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Sally Stephenson
2W–14L career · 3 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.