Stonebridge Ranch/Graham-Martinson W3.0
2025 DALLAS TENNIS N · A 18 & Over ADULT Fall W. Friday
12 players · average NTRP 3.30 / TEXAS
No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.
Schedule8 played
i
Flight standings20 teams · A 18 & Over ADULT Fall W. Friday
| Team | W | L | Sets lost | Games lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1DAC/Sisk-Griffin W3.0 | 8 | 0 | 12 | 169 |
| 2Canyon Creek/Mathews W3.0 | 7 | 1 | 18 | 189 |
| 3Lakes @ CH/Springer W3.0 | 7 | 1 | 20 | 233 |
| 4Stonebridge Ranch/Graham-Martinson W3.0 | 7 | 1 | 20 | 212 |
| 5Lakes/Colston-Bowersox W3.0 | 7 | 1 | 22 | 215 |
| 6DAC/Kendall W3.0 | 7 | 1 | 27 | 246 |
| 7Samuell Grand/Nicholson-Carpenter W3.0 | 6 | 2 | 24 | 215 |
| 8Cooper Fitness/Liechty-Moore W3.0S | 5 | 3 | 22 | 241 |
| 9Stonebriar/Boyd-Anderson W3.0 | 5 | 3 | 34 | 286 |
| 10High Point/Esh-Plunkett W3.0 | 5 | 3 | 35 | 270 |
| 11Greenhill/Wilson W3.0 | 4 | 4 | 37 | 300 |
| 12SpringPark/S. Nolen W3.0 | 4 | 4 | 41 | 299 |
| 13Huffhines/Fish-Davis W3.0 | 3 | 5 | 37 | 293 |
| 14Lakes/Johnson-Frazier W3.0 | 3 | 5 | 37 | 291 |
| 15DCC/McCullough W3.0 | 3 | 5 | 40 | 296 |
| 16Stonebridge Ranch/Flock-Paulson W3.0 | 3 | 5 | 41 | 322 |
| 17Bent Tree/Grzych-Foster W3.0 | 3 | 5 | 43 | 323 |
| 18DAC/Rainey-Shortt W3.0 | 2 | 6 | 44 | 316 |
| 19Canyon Creek/Butz-Walsh W3.0 | 2 | 6 | 49 | 338 |
| 20Lakewood/Harrison W3.0 | 1 | 7 | 47 | 330 |
Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.
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 2.99 estimated across 9 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.
Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.
| Aubrey Kennedy + Kelly Killinger | 4–2 | 65% games | +19.2% vs expected |
| Cindy Graham + Carrie Martinson | 5–2 | 58% games | +10.6% vs expected |
| Carrie Martinson + Dianne Dolly Reid | 6–2 | 56% games | +10.0% vs expected |
| Cindy Graham + Lea Ellsworth | 4–2 | 57% games | +6.2% vs expected |
| Cindy Graham + Kelly Killinger | 9–0 | 75% games | not enough data |
| Carrie Martinson + Aubrey Kennedy | 3–2 | 61% games | not enough data |
| Carrie Martinson + Kelly Killinger | 5–0 | 79% games | not enough data |
| Kelly Killinger + Lea Ellsworth | 5–0 | 77% games | not enough data |
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.
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.