Teams

UPTA40S/Allen/Pavilion

2026 UPTA Singles 40 & Over - SC · 40+ Singles Women - 3.5

6 players · average NTRP 3.38 / SOUTH CAROLINA

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 upcoming · 4 played
Sep 18 9:00 AM
vs N/A
Emily Allen
Sep 25 9:00 AM
Riverwalk Tennis Courts
Oct 2 9:00 AM
vs
The Pavilion
Oct 9 9:00 AM
Cardinal Racquet Club
Oct 16 9:00 AM
The Pavilion
Oct 23 9:00 AM
vs N/A
Emily Allen
2026-09-11vs UPTA40S/Hill/GCCWon 21
W#1 SinglesAustin Clay vs Elizabeth Philmon6-3, 6-1
W#2 SinglesNatilee Falk vs Betsy Norwood4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 SinglesBrie Soler vs Mary Frances Knapp4-6, 1-6
2026-09-04vs UPTA40S/Murillo/CardinalSplit 11
L#1 SinglesAndrea Scoggins vs Caroline Carter3-6, 6-1, 0-1
W#2 SinglesLeigh Wolke vs Jeanette ELLIOTT6-2, 6-0
2026-08-28vs UPTA40S/Seeley/Thornblade/Won 30
W#1 SinglesAustin Clay vs Kelly Wheeler6-0, 6-3
W#2 SinglesElizabeth Raduns vs Laura Garrett6-3, 6-3
W#3 SinglesBrie Soler vs Jill Thompson7-5, 4-6, 1-0
2026-08-21vs UPTA40S/Knight/RiverWalkWon 30
W#1 SinglesLeigh Wolke vs Lara Knight6-2, 6-3
W#2 SinglesAndrea Scoggins vs Bethany Pratt6-7, 6-0, 1-0
W#3 SinglesNatilee Falk vs Natalie Ruggiero6-1, 7-5
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 standings5 teams · 40+ Singles Women - 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1UPTA40S/Murillo/Cardinal000000
2UPTA40S/Knight/RiverWalk000000
3UPTA40S/Hill/GCC000000
4UPTA40S/Seeley/Thornblade/000000
5UPTA40S/Allen/Pavilion000000

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 3.31 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.

3.53
Leigh Wolke
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
3.43
Austin Clay
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.43
Elizabeth Raduns
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.29
Natilee Falk
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
3.16
Andrea Scoggins
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.05
Brie Soler
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
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.

Elizabeth Raduns + Leigh Wolke314 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.

Leigh Wolke
41W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%41%59%
3.53
3.5
Austin Clay
27W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
3.43
3.5
Elizabeth Raduns
54W–15L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%71%28%
3.43
Natilee Falk
22W–32L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Andrea Scoggins
17W–39L career · 2 lines in 2026
11%89%<1%
3.16
3
Brie Soler
31W–32L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.05

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.