Teams

UPTA18A/Walter/LLAS

18 & Over · 18 & Over LLAS - Women 5.0

7 players · average NTRP 4.75 / SOUTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-06-14vs UPTA18A/Sherman/LLASLost 12
W#1 DoublesBrooke Walter / Madison Cook vs Curran Carver / Amanda Sherman6-2, 6-3
L#1 SinglesMiranda Unthank vs Amy Gaal0-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesNancy O'Dell-Keim / Karen Warren vs Jessica Vest / Emma Pixley4-6, 3-6
2025-06-14vs CTL18/Barrett/IndepWon 21
L#1 DoublesKaren Warren / Samantha Sullivan vs Abby Carpenter / Ellen Zhu1-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesBrooke Walter vs MacY Cope6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesNancy O'Dell-Keim / Madison Cook vs Madeleine Moore / Justine Cox7-6, 6-3
2025-06-13vs CTL18/Barrett/IndepLost 12
L#1 DoublesMadison Cook / Nancy O'Dell-Keim vs Abby Carpenter / Ellen Zhu2-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#1 SinglesBrooke Walter vs MacY Cope6-2, 6-0
L#2 DoublesKaren Warren / Miranda Unthank vs Lisa Barrett / Justine Cox2-6, 4-6
2025-06-13vs UPTA18A/Sherman/LLASLost 12
L#1 DoublesMadison Cook / Chelsea Boehme vs Amy Gaal / Zoe Campbell4-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesMiranda Unthank vs Curran Carver3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesBrooke Walter / Karen Warren vs Emma Pixley / Jessica Vest7-6, 2-6, 1-0
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 18 & Over LLAS - Women 5.0 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 4.42 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.

Brooke Walter
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 5
4.69
Madison Cook
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
4.48
Chelsea Boehme
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.09
Karen Warren
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Miranda Unthank
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Nancy O'Dell-Keim
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Samantha Sullivan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Samantha Sullivan + Chelsea Boehme6270% games+13.4% vs expected
Madison Cook + Chelsea Boehme224 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.

5
Brooke Walter
13W–2L career · type A · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Madison Cook
18W–8L career · 4 lines in 2025
8%92%1%
4.69
4.5
Chelsea Boehme
25W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%57%43%
4.48
Karen Warren
8W–10L career · 4 lines in 2025
25%75%<1%
4.09
Miranda Unthank
0W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Nancy O'Dell-Keim
2W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Samantha Sullivan
13W–9L career · 1 line 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.