Teams

Wood/PH

2023 TUL TRI-LEVEL DAY 18 & Over League · WOMEN 3.5

14 players · average NTRP 3.94 / OKLAHOMA

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 →
Schedule6 played
2023-09-01vs Koors/LFLost 03
L#1 DoublesDiane Wood / Jacqueline Burks vs Kris Koors / Cheryl Hughes5-7, 4-6
L#2 DoublesLaura Hawkins / Michelle Leonard vs Gina Hasty / Tonia Parsons4-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesAnnmarie Wright / Cynthia Harp vs Tracy Earls / Stephanie Zahn3-6, 1-6
2023-08-31vs TRI Day: Montgomery/LFLost 12
L#1 DoublesJacqueline Burks / Laura Hawkins vs Liz Montgomery / Julie Heil3-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMary Jo Tasker / Diane Wood vs Karen Metcalf / Jessica Block0-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesErin Collins / Cheryl Barnard vs Melynda Stone / Kimberly KnifeChief6-3, 6-4
2023-08-30vs Koors/LFLost 03
L#1 DoublesMichelle Leonard / Diane Wood vs Kris Koors / Susie Anderson4-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesErin Collins / Cheryl Barnard vs Melissa Parker / Michelle Oquin2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesAnnmarie Wright / Allison Eve vs Nancy Burris / Tracy Earls3-6, 3-6
2023-08-11vs Koors/LFLost 12
W#1 DoublesNatalie Evans / Caroline Henry vs Susie Anderson / Morgan Guernsey5-7, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMichelle Leonard / Allison Eve vs Gina Hasty / Melissa Parker4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesAnnmarie Wright / Erin Collins vs Deborah Hale / Tracy Earls4-6, 4-6
2023-07-26vs TRI Day: Montgomery/LFLost 12
W#1 DoublesCaroline Henry / Diane Wood vs Liz Montgomery / Anjana Simpson7-6, 6-2
L#2 DoublesMichelle Leonard / Erin Collins vs Karen Metcalf / Jessica Block0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesCynthia Harp / Allison Eve vs Melynda Stone / Kimberly KnifeChief2-6, 7-6, 0-1
2023-07-21vs TRI Day: Montgomery/LFLost 12
W#1 DoublesMichelle Leonard / Natalie Evans vs Liz Montgomery / Alexandra Simmons6-2, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDiane Wood / Mary Jo Tasker vs Karen Metcalf / Jessica Block4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesCynthia Harp / Annmarie Wright vs Melynda Stone / Amy Whitten1-6, 2-6
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 · WOMEN 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1TRI Day: Montgomery/LF5113515142
2Koors/LF4210817168
3Wood/PH0641430202

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 3.42 estimated across 11 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.

Caroline Henry
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
Emily Abrams
published 4.5
Jacqueline Burks
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.85
Natalie Evans
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.77
Michelle Leonard
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.59
Cheryl Barnard
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.53
Mary Jo Tasker
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.50
Diane Wood
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.49
Laura Hawkins
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.28
Erin Collins
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.26
Allison Eve
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.16
Kathleen Harris
published
3.10
Annmarie Wright
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.09
Cynthia Harp
usually #3 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.

Erin Collins + Cheryl Barnard17560% games+16.4% vs expected
Cynthia Harp + Annmarie Wright16953% games+7.4% vs expected
Mary Jo Tasker + Diane Wood181353% games+3.4% vs expected
Michelle Leonard + Diane Wood151350% games+3.0% vs expected
Michelle Leonard + Laura Hawkins4842% games+1.8% vs expected
Allison Eve + Kathleen Harris7556% games+1.3% vs expected
Diane Wood + Laura Hawkins3445% games−5.7% vs expected
Caroline Henry + Diane Wood4151% games−6.8% 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.

4.5
Caroline Henry
24W–20L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
4.5
Emily Abrams
7W–10L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
4.5
Jacqueline Burks
10W–21L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Natalie Evans
28W–35L career · 2 lines in 2023
88%12%<1%
3.85
Michelle Leonard
127W–105L career · 5 lines in 2023
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Cheryl Barnard
89W–40L career · 5 lines in 2023
23%76%<1%
3.59
Mary Jo Tasker
67W–78L career · 2 lines in 2023
41%59%<1%
3.53
4
Diane Wood
146W–157L career · 5 lines in 2023
50%50%<1%
3.50
Laura Hawkins
30W–68L career · 2 lines in 2023
52%48%<1%
3.49
3.5
Erin Collins
88W–57L career · 7 lines in 2023
2%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Allison Eve
62W–73L career · 3 lines in 2023
2%94%3%
3.26
Kathleen Harris
107W–99L career · no lines in 2023
12%88%<1%
3.16
3.5
Annmarie Wright
63W–62L career · 4 lines in 2023
23%77%<1%
3.10
3.5
Cynthia Harp
96W–90L career · 3 lines in 2023
25%75%<1%
3.09

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.