Teams

Montana/Erickson/40 & Over-4.0W

2025 USTA Adult 40 & Over · Women 4.0 - 40 & Over

10 players · average NTRP 4.10 / MONTANA

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 →
Schedule4 played
2025-07-27vs Montana's Blended FamilySplit 22
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Lund / Elizabeth Matthews vs Anna Collins / Amber Rassi6-3, 6-4
W#1 SinglesDanielle Smith vs Breanne Lundy6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesKandy Chain / Michelle Grocke vs Tara Jensen / Mandy Smoker Broaddus6-4, 5-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesStacie Wunsch / Mary Kathryn Tennille vs Heidi Fox / Cassie Springer4-6, 1-6
2025-07-27vs Oakey'sSplit 22
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Lund / Elizabeth Matthews vs Anna Bishop / Mary Ellen Stewart4-6, 5-7
W#1 SinglesMary Kathryn Tennille vs Tori Hummel6-3, 6-0
L#2 DoublesAmy Gallik / Stacie Wunsch vs Brandi Leedham-Erwin / Erin Anderson4-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#3 DoublesMichelle Grocke / Danielle Smith vs Jan DeCosse / Olivia Gregory6-1, 6-2
2025-07-26vs Mid Court CrisisWon 30
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Lund / Danielle Smith vs Kimimi Ashley / Sherrie Fuller-Benge6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesErica Renslow / Taylor Erickson vs Willa Craig / Sarah Miller2-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesHannah Shirkey / Amy Gallik vs Sue Clark / Susan Ward6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2025-07-25vs Glacier GritSplit 22
W#1 DoublesHannah Shirkey / Kandy Chain vs Courtney Torgerson / Sara Hemmer7-5, 6-4
W#1 SinglesMary Kathryn Tennille vs Tracey Gran6-4, 6-4
L#2 DoublesAmy Gallik / Danielle Smith vs Doris Puglisi / Anne Oehlerich3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesErica Renslow / Taylor Erickson vs Caroline Bennett / Jennie Brawn6-7, 6-2, 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 standings for Women 4.0 - 40 & Over 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 3.97 estimated across 3 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.

4.13
Hannah Shirkey
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
3.99
Elizabeth Lund
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.78
Danielle Smith
usually #2 Doubles 25%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
Amy Gallik
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
Elizabeth Matthews
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
Erica Renslow
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Mary Kathryn Tennille
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Michelle Grocke
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Stacie Wunsch
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Taylor Erickson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Taylor Erickson + Elizabeth Lund7076% games+12.7% vs expected
Taylor Erickson + Erica Renslow9456% games+7.3% vs expected
Danielle Smith + Elizabeth Lund8258% games−6.3% vs expected
Stacie Wunsch + Mary Kathryn Tennille1443% gamesnot enough data
Taylor Erickson + Hannah Shirkey404 matchesnot enough data
Elizabeth Lund + Hannah Shirkey224 matchesnot enough data
Stacie Wunsch + Elizabeth Matthews303 matchesnot enough data
Stacie Wunsch + Elizabeth Lund123 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.

4.5
Hannah Shirkey
42W–18L career · 4 lines in 2025
17%82%<1%
4.13
4
Elizabeth Lund
76W–48L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%52%48%
3.99
4
Danielle Smith
59W–50L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.78
4
Amy Gallik
7W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Elizabeth Matthews
18W–26L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Erica Renslow
11W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mary Kathryn Tennille
5W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Michelle Grocke
6W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stacie Wunsch
12W–18L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Taylor Erickson
30W–11L career · 2 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.