Teams

Liberty Park Tennis-Tieff

2023 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 4.0W PM

20 players · average NTRP 4.00 / UTAH

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
2023-06-03Split 11
L#2 DoublesAimee Nilson / Hayley Pratt vs Staci McCubbins / Maria Lombardi6-7, 1-6
W#2 SinglesLindsay Bianucci vs Berit Campion6-3, 7-5
2023-05-30vs Sunpro-Blackhurst/MayberryLost 01
L#3 DoublesKalee King / Amy Powell vs Pam Ollivier / Tiffany Olson4-6, 4-6
2023-05-16vs Liberty Park Tennis-DayWon 10
W#1 SinglesSandra Stahle vs Sofia Hayes7-6, 3-6, 1-0
2023-05-09Won 10
W#2 DoublesHayley Pratt / Lindsay Bianucci vs Tiffany Renfro / Julie Labrum6-1, 6-0
2023-05-02Won 20
W#2 DoublesRegan Tieff / Ui Afualo vs Whitni Skousen / Amy Allen6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAimee Nilson / Hayley Pratt vs Angie Haskins / Heather Jensen2-6, 7-5, 1-0
2023-04-25vs Liberty Park Tennis-Knight/TaylorWon 20
W#1 SinglesSandra Stahle vs Kathryn Tagge6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesAmy Powell / Regan Tieff vs Kim Cronin / Gabriela Stanifer6-4, 6-1
2023-04-11Split 11
W#1 SinglesSandra Stahle vs Crystel Fox7-5, 6-2
L#3 DoublesKalee King / Lindsay Bianucci vs Christine Fotheringham / Susan Koelliker1-6, 3-6
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 4.0W PM 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 3.66 estimated across 13 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.

3.86
Lindsay Knight
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.85
Adrienne Davis
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
3.83
Sidney van Tussenbrook
usually #2 Singles 40%, also #1 Singles 20% · published
3.81
Olivia Hu
usually #1 Doubles 29%, also #2 Doubles 21% · published
3.76
Ui Afualo
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
Andy Rich
published 4
Cameron Babbitt
published 4
Lindsay Bianucci
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.73
Regan Tieff
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Kalee King
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.64
Jordyn Parry
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 31% · published 4
3.60
Sandra Stahle
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.60
Jennifer Moreton
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.48
Aimee Nilson
usually #2 Doubles 63%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.42
Amy Powell
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.27
Janice Stokes-Burns
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Elizabeth Vigil
usually #1 Singles 41%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
Hayley Pratt
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
SHANNON RICH
published
Sarah DeMark
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.

Amy Powell + Regan Tieff9265% games+13.4% vs expected
Jordyn Parry + Lindsay Knight5068% games+13.0% vs expected
Elizabeth Vigil + Sidney van Tussenbrook4361% games+12.5% vs expected
Adrienne Davis + Olivia Hu7257% games+9.4% vs expected
Sarah DeMark + Jennifer Moreton4153% games+7.3% vs expected
Jordyn Parry + Elizabeth Vigil7357% games+7.1% vs expected
Jennifer Moreton + Regan Tieff9163% games+6.8% vs expected
Regan Tieff + Lindsay Knight4452% games+2.4% vs expected
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.

Lindsay Knight
105W–41L career · 6 lines in 2023
1%84%15%
3.86
4.5
Adrienne Davis
56W–59L career · 8 lines in 2023
85%15%<1%
3.85
Sidney van Tussenbrook
17W–17L career · 5 lines in 2023
1%88%11%
3.83
Olivia Hu
72W–65L career · 12 lines in 2023
<1%1%99%
3.81
4
Ui Afualo
157W–149L career · 4 lines in 2023
3%93%4%
3.76
4
Andy Rich
19W–26L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Cameron Babbitt
73W–10L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Lindsay Bianucci
60W–66L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Regan Tieff
196W–107L career · 2 lines in 2023
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Kalee King
117W–93L career · 7 lines in 2023
6%92%2%
3.72
4
Jordyn Parry
168W–127L career · 13 lines in 2023
16%84%1%
3.64
Sandra Stahle
31W–32L career · 3 lines in 2023
23%77%<1%
3.60
4
Jennifer Moreton
103W–122L career · 2 lines in 2023
24%76%<1%
3.60
4
Aimee Nilson
53W–119L career · 8 lines in 2023
54%46%<1%
3.48
4
Amy Powell
98W–65L career · 2 lines in 2023
73%27%<1%
3.42
3.5
Janice Stokes-Burns
132W–134L career · 6 lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.27
Elizabeth Vigil
97W–75L career · 16 lines in 2023
not enough data
Hayley Pratt
48W–37L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
SHANNON RICH
8W–15L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Sarah DeMark
28W–21L career · no lines in 2023
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.