Teams

Bartz 4.0 40+ Winter 26

2026 Adult 40 & Over Winter · 4.0 Women

17 players · average NTRP 3.79 / NORTHERN

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-03-26vs Hommeyer/HulbertLost 05
L#1 DoublesAlexis Siegel-Carlson / Joanna Poinar vs Cathy Paper / Maria Johnson1-6, 6-7
L#1 SinglesLauren Bralski vs Rory Osberg0-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesSara Evens / Emily Andrisevic vs Sarah Johnson / Jennifer Johnson1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesElizabeth Zierke / Christeen Paulison vs Jane Fields / Lori Henrich4-6, 2-6
L#4 DoublesAlesia Pehl / Sonia Miller-Vanoort vs Angela Fischels / Sarah Jane Johnson6-7, 6-2, 0-1
2026-03-12vs REILING-STOUT WINTER 40+Lost 13
L#1 DoublesJoanna Poinar / Alexis Siegel-Carlson vs Kara Pederson / Carol Schmelz3-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesBarbara Brill vs Gina Boyer3-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesEmily Andrisevic / Carrie Chang vs Martha Shannon / Doreen Remington6-4, 6-4
L#3 DoublesRachel Lund / Christeen Paulison vs Lisa LaCombe / Melissa Uppgren1-6, 4-6
2026-03-05vs Agre/AndreWon 31
L#1 DoublesAlexis Siegel-Carlson / Barbara Brill vs Genevieve Swanson / Alicia Andre1-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesEmily Andrisevic / Sara Evens vs Hillary Olson / Mary O'Brien4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSonia Miller-Vanoort / Alesia Pehl vs Suzanne Harman / Carey Mcgovern6-7, 6-4, 1-0
W#4 DoublesEDLYN KROENING / Sarah Steiniger vs Leeann Bell / Shannon Yee7-6, 3-6, 1-0
2026-02-19vs Hommeyer/HulbertLost 14
L#1 DoublesSonia Miller-Vanoort / Carrie Chang vs Sarah Johnson / Jennifer Johnson0-6, 0-6
L#1 SinglesSarah Steiniger vs Megan Wrobel2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJoanna Poinar / Alexis Siegel-Carlson vs Jane Fields / Rita McDonald4-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesEmily Andrisevic / Sara Evens vs Angela Fischels / Laura Peterson6-3, 6-2
L#4 DoublesAlesia Pehl / Rachel Lund vs Sarah Jane Johnson / Tiffany Anderson4-6, 3-6
2026-02-12vs Jensen: 40's Winter 26Lost 14
L#1 DoublesBarbara Brill / Carrie Chang vs Kristin Nesseth / Nicole Lechner1-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesLauren Bralski vs Mia Robillos1-5
L#2 DoublesRachel Lund / Christeen Paulison vs Susan Gherity / Rachel Reese2-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesKim Bartz / Joanna Poinar vs Ruth Church / Margaret Creighton6-4, 7-5
L#4 DoublesElizabeth Zierke / Christina Ticer vs Donna Jensen / Jocelyne Renault4-6, 4-6
2026-02-06vs REILING-STOUT WINTER 40+Lost 23
L#1 DoublesCarrie Chang / Barbara Brill vs Carol Schmelz / Erika Skanse0-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesSarah Steiniger vs Gina Boyer2-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesAlexis Siegel-Carlson / Joanna Poinar vs Melissa Uppgren / Devie Erickson2-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSara Evens / Emily Andrisevic vs Martha Shannon / Doreen Remington6-2, 6-3
L#4 DoublesAlesia Pehl / Amy Gleason vs Sara Hong / Norma Wolk2-6, 3-6
2026-01-29vs Agre/AndreLost 05
L#1 DoublesSonia Miller-Vanoort / Alexis Siegel-Carlson vs Genevieve Swanson / Stacey Jansa4-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesSarah Steiniger vs Marcela Palavecino2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesSara Evens / Emily Andrisevic vs Johanna Gennrich / Carey Mcgovern7-6, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesEDLYN KROENING / Alesia Pehl vs Caroline Agre / Rebekah Moscatelli4-6, 2-6
L#4 DoublesKim Bartz / Julie Katz vs Jamie Lukehart-Hobbs / Carrie Valois3-6, 2-6
2026-01-08vs Jensen: 40's Winter 26Lost 13
L#1 DoublesSonia Miller-Vanoort / Barbara Brill vs Kathy Brandt / Kristin Nesseth3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#1 SinglesSarah Steiniger vs Vanessa Sexton6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesEmily Andrisevic / Alesia Pehl vs Angel Nasrabadi / Ruth Church6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesKim Bartz / EDLYN KROENING vs Susan Gherity / Jocelyne Renault2-6, 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 standings3 teams · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Jensen: 40's Winter 2671291134321
2REILING-STOUT WINTER 40+53182248378
3Bartz 4.0 40+ Winter 2617112962421

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 3.53 estimated across 17 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.

3.73
Alexis Siegel-Carlson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.64
Sara Evens
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
3.63
Lauren Bralski
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.62
Carrie Chang
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.62
Christeen Paulison
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.61
Emily Andrisevic
usually #2 Doubles 71%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.59
Joanna Poinar
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.59
Sonia Miller-Vanoort
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #4 Doubles 20% · published
3.57
Rachel Lund
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #4 Doubles 33% · published
3.53
Barbara Brill
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #1 Singles 20% · published 4
3.53
Alesia Pehl
usually #4 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.51
EDLYN KROENING
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #4 Doubles 33% · published
3.44
Amy Gleason
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.43
Sarah Steiniger
usually #1 Singles 80%, also #4 Doubles 20% · published
3.41
Kim Bartz
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #4 Doubles 33% · published
3.37
Elizabeth Zierke
usually #4 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.26
Christina Ticer
usually #4 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
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.

Sarah Steiniger + Alesia Pehl6453% games+7.1% vs expected
Sarah Steiniger + EDLYN KROENING9259% games+4.2% vs expected
EDLYN KROENING + Alesia Pehl14557% games+3.2% vs expected
Elizabeth Zierke + Christina Ticer0534% games−0.4% vs expected
Joanna Poinar + Alexis Siegel-Carlson101949% games−1.8% vs expected
Sara Evens + Emily Andrisevic3253% gamesnot enough data
Christeen Paulison + Rachel Lund134 matchesnot enough data
Alexis Siegel-Carlson + Carrie Chang134 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
Alexis Siegel-Carlson
26W–41L career · 6 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.73
Sara Evens
19W–31L career · 5 lines in 2026
16%84%1%
3.64
Lauren Bralski
19W–27L career · 2 lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
3.63
4
Carrie Chang
14W–15L career · 4 lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
3.62
4
Christeen Paulison
4W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.62
Emily Andrisevic
29W–10L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%21%79%
3.61
Joanna Poinar
18W–27L career · 5 lines in 2026
26%74%<1%
3.59
Sonia Miller-Vanoort
2W–8L career · 5 lines in 2026
26%73%<1%
3.59
Rachel Lund
54W–46L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%30%70%
3.57
4
Barbara Brill
9W–54L career · 5 lines in 2026
42%58%<1%
3.53
3.5
Alesia Pehl
33W–35L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%43%57%
3.53
EDLYN KROENING
36W–20L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%48%52%
3.51
3.5
Amy Gleason
28W–33L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%65%35%
3.44
Sarah Steiniger
34W–19L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%70%30%
3.43
Kim Bartz
117W–122L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
3.41
Elizabeth Zierke
12W–11L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%82%17%
3.37
3.5
Christina Ticer
5W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
3%93%4%
3.26

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.