Teams

CMTA @ Liberty Park-King

2021 USTA Adult 40 & Over · 4.0W PM

18 players · average NTRP 4.07 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2021-08-12Split 11
L#2 DoublesCatherine Lever / Rochelle Huff vs Andrea Smith / Shelli Johnston0-6, 6-1, 0-1
W#3 DoublesDiane Richardson / Betty Yamashita vs Joanna Larsen / Cary Jones6-4, 7-5
W#2 DoublesCatherine Lever / Emily King vs Mandy Berg / Nalisa Dunford6-2, 1-6, 1-0
2021-07-27vs Cottonwood Club-WarrenLost 02
L#1 SinglesHeidi Brophy vs Maria Brockbank5-7, 4-6
L#3 DoublesCatherine Lever / Sherry Young vs Carole Sharp / Janice Smith1-6, 3-6
2021-07-15Won 20
W#2 DoublesCatherine Lever / Rochelle Huff vs Ann Trentman / Lisa Ewing6-3, 7-6
W#3 DoublesBetty Yamashita / Diane Richardson vs Allison Leishman / Alena Taylor6-4, 6-4
2021-07-01vs CMTA @ Liberty Park-Rich/RichWon 10
W#3 DoublesHeidi Brophy / Catherine Lever vs Lori Day / Terry Houston6-2, 6-3
2021-06-24vs Park City MARC-Greenhalgh/BrooksLost 01
L#2 DoublesDiane Richardson / Betty Yamashita vs Denise Konrad / Stephanie Lesko1-6, 0-6
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 · 4.0W PM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CMTA @ Liberty Park-McManus/Johnson7126618220
2Sports Mall-Kasteler/DowDell6223922218
3CMTA @ Liberty Park-King44161636282

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 3.80 estimated across 12 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.

4.18
Marissa Jackson
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
4.14
Christine Fotheringham
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4.5
4.09
Nanette Heath
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
3.99
Julie Cooley
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.96
Alisa Gardner
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.92
Emily Wallace
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
3.85
Daisy Carlson
usually #1 Singles 25%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
Catherine Lever
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
Heather Paddock
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
Heidi Maxfield
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.75
Amy Earl
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.67
Mindy Dunyon
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.65
Heidi Brophy
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 4
3.33
Megan Schey
usually #1 Singles 63%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.02
Betty Yamashita
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Nichole Young
published
Rochelle Huff
published
Sherry Young
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · 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.

Heidi Maxfield + Marissa Jackson11557% games+15.5% vs expected
Amy Earl + Alisa Gardner19369% games+11.7% vs expected
Alisa Gardner + Christine Fotheringham14562% games+10.5% vs expected
Emily Wallace + Catherine Lever10558% games+9.4% vs expected
Mindy Dunyon + Christine Fotheringham12363% games+6.6% vs expected
Emily Wallace + Nanette Heath351358% games+5.9% vs expected
Julie Cooley + Christine Fotheringham25760% games+5.5% vs expected
Amy Earl + Christine Fotheringham34661% games+5.3% 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
Marissa Jackson
110W–41L career · 7 lines in 2021
8%91%1%
4.18
4.5
Christine Fotheringham
213W–62L career · 10 lines in 2021
14%86%<1%
4.14
4.5
Nanette Heath
134W–74L career · 8 lines in 2021
24%76%<1%
4.09
Julie Cooley
63W–26L career · 2 lines in 2021
53%47%<1%
3.99
4
Alisa Gardner
197W–48L career · 8 lines in 2021
<1%63%37%
3.96
4.5
Emily Wallace
93W–98L career · 7 lines in 2021
74%26%<1%
3.92
4
Daisy Carlson
186W–93L career · 4 lines in 2021
<1%88%12%
3.85
4
Catherine Lever
40W–30L career · 5 lines in 2021
not enough data
4
Heather Paddock
121W–95L career · 8 lines in 2021
not enough data
4
Heidi Maxfield
127W–86L career · 6 lines in 2021
not enough data
4
Amy Earl
108W–46L career · 6 lines in 2021
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Mindy Dunyon
121W–85L career · 10 lines in 2021
10%89%1%
3.67
4
Heidi Brophy
76W–55L career · 2 lines in 2021
13%87%<1%
3.65
3.5
Megan Schey
130W–131L career · 8 lines in 2021
1%90%10%
3.33
3.5
Betty Yamashita
26W–30L career · 3 lines in 2021
43%57%<1%
3.02
Nichole Young
0W–13L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Rochelle Huff
0W–2L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Sherry Young
15W–42L career · 4 lines in 2021
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.