Teams

Artman-Dream Team

2026 One Doubles-Winter · 3.0 Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.00 / SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-04-29vs Kim/Seay-Smash SquadLost 01
L#1 DoublesTheanne Sandbo / Anneliese Johnson vs Hyo Han / Mi Ae Kim5-7, 6-1, 0-1
2026-04-27vs Nielson-LCTA Jill & CoWon 10
W#1 DoublesLeslie Artman / Kristina Maritczak vs Jill Nielson / Lori Denton3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2026-04-20vs PetersWon 10
W#1 DoublesLeslie Artman / Theanne Sandbo vs Julie Peters / Ellen Stagnone6-1, 6-4
2026-04-18vs PetersLost 01
L#1 DoublesLeslie Artman / Bobbie Bailey vs Lacy Fehrenbach / Julie Peters2-6, 6-3, 0-1
2026-04-12vs KingWon 10
W#1 DoublesKristina Maritczak / Bobbie Bailey vs Alison Ambauen / Laura King6-4, 4-5
2026-03-29vs Smith (Winter)Won 10
W#1 DoublesElizabeth McDougall / Theanne Sandbo vs Lisa Smith / Shanan Hedges6-4, 6-3
2026-03-12vs KingLost 01
L#1 DoublesLeslie Artman / Elizabeth McDougall vs Rebecca Hinman / Lucy Davis6-2, 4-6, 0-1
2026-02-16vs Lisa/MollyLost 01
L#1 DoublesAnneliese Johnson / Bobbie Bailey vs Lindy Mense / Lisa Rehberger3-6, 6-1, 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 3.0 Women 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 2.81 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.

2.99
Anneliese Johnson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.90
Theanne Sandbo
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.87
Bobbie Bailey
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.74
Leslie Artman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.73
Elizabeth McDougall
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.65
Kristina Maritczak
usually #1 Doubles 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.

Leslie Artman + Elizabeth McDougall9661% games+11.1% vs expected
Anneliese Johnson + Theanne Sandbo3458% games+6.5% vs expected
Elizabeth McDougall + Theanne Sandbo3346% games−4.0% vs expected
Leslie Artman + Theanne Sandbo314 matchesnot enough data
Elizabeth McDougall + Anneliese Johnson224 matchesnot enough data
Elizabeth McDougall + Kristina Maritczak303 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.

3
Anneliese Johnson
57W–37L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
2.99
3
Theanne Sandbo
31W–23L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%77%23%
2.90
3
Bobbie Bailey
79W–76L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%82%17%
2.87
3
Leslie Artman
53W–34L career · 4 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
2.74
3
Elizabeth McDougall
46W–25L career · 2 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
2.73
3
Kristina Maritczak
23W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
14%85%1%
2.65

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.