Teams

LTA-P PURPLE

2025 CTA ADULT 18-39 - DEN · WOMEN 4.0 - ADULT 18-39 - DEN

7 players · average NTRP 3.75 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule7 played
2025-07-15vs NJ NAVYSplit 11
L#1 Female DoublesOlimpia Mejia / Tara Tovar vs Erica Moser / Katherine Lazenby3-6, 1-6
W#1 Female SinglesAmita Pandey vs Adrienne Tosto6-2, 6-3
2025-07-13vs BP GREENLost 01
L#1 Female DoublesHalonah Paiss / Tara Tovar vs Madison Fortunato / Alexandra Wingert1-6, 0-6
2025-07-08vs PRKR YELLOWLost 01
L#1 Female DoublesOlimpia Mejia / Christine Bonthius vs Victoria Keller / Annie Ross7-6, 5-7, 1-0
2025-07-01vs NJ TEALSplit 11
L#1 Female DoublesChristine Bonthius / Tara Tovar vs Callie Hennessy / Paige Orgel7-5, 5-7, 0-1
W#1 Female SinglesAmita Pandey vs Bailey Duplessis6-0, 6-0
2025-06-17vs KC-RH REDLost 01
L#1 Female DoublesAmita Pandey / Halonah Paiss vs Emma Schilling / Sarah Schoeffel3-6, 2-6
2025-06-10vs NJ NAVYSplit 11
W#1 Female DoublesTara Tovar / Amita Pandey vs Casey Rhine / Sally Swiatek6-1, 4-6, 1-0
L#1 Female SinglesOlimpia Mejia vs Lisa Christman7-6, 3-6, 0-1
2025-06-03vs PRKR YELLOWWon 10
W#1 Female DoublesAmita Pandey / Olimpia Mejia vs Reana Kaminsky / Chelsea Sump6-2, 6-2
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 standings4 teams · WOMEN 4.0 - ADULT 18-39 - DEN
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1KC-RH RED34111024178
2PRKR YELLOW34101124181
3LTA-P PURPLE1671430200
4NJ TEAL1641736234

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 3.73 estimated across 7 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.

3.97
Amita Pandey
usually #1 Female Doubles 60%, also #1 Female Singles 40% · published 4
3.96
Sandra Waters
published
3.94
Olimpia Mejia
usually #1 Female Doubles 75%, also #1 Female Singles 25% · published 4
3.81
Laura Nagel
published
3.79
Ronnie Meyers
published
3.63
Christine Bonthius
usually #1 Female Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.02
Tara Tovar
usually #1 Female Doubles 100% · published 3.5
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.

Amita Pandey + Olimpia Mejia303 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
Amita Pandey
49W–22L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%57%43%
3.97
Sandra Waters
13W–2L career · no lines in 2025
<1%61%38%
3.96
4
Olimpia Mejia
94W–53L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%65%35%
3.94
Laura Nagel
18W–7L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.81
Ronnie Meyers
6W–7L career · no lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.79
3.5
Christine Bonthius
77W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%17%83%
3.63
3.5
Tara Tovar
29W–36L career · 4 lines in 2025
44%56%<1%
3.02

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.