Teams

GSCC PURPLE

2022 USTA ADULT 18 & OVER - ASPEN · MOUNTAINS

11 players · average NTRP 3.00 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule2 played
2022-06-18vs MEADOWSSplit 22
W#1 DoublesSusie Demers / Ksana Oglesby vs Alexandra Dalton / Melissa Wilkinson6-2, 3-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesKeely Eberly vs Julie Ernst6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesChance Balis / Melody Morris vs Jacqueline Clancy / Walker Simmons6-2, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesDebbie Birch / Judith Byrns vs TONI COURTENAY / Mary Lackner7-6, 5-7, 0-1
2022-06-11vs GSCCLost 03
L#1 DoublesSusie Demers / Ksana Oglesby vs Heather Knott / Angela Johnson2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMelody Morris / Keely Eberly vs Carolyn Strautman / Shauna de Moraes3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesDebbie Birch / Judith Byrns vs Barb Hovde-Brown / Lisa Hartert2-6, 6-7
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 MOUNTAINS 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 2.73 estimated across 7 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.

3.05
Keely Eberly
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3.5
2.90
Susie Demers
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.83
Ksana Oglesby
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.77
Kate Leibinger
published
Amy Treese
published 3
Chance Balis
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.73
Anna Lorenson
published 3
2.41
Melody Morris
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.39
Debbie Birch
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
Judith Byrns
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Kayla Thomson
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.

Susie Demers + Anna Lorenson3650% games+0.9% vs expected
Susie Demers + Keely Eberly3444% games−2.8% vs expected
Melody Morris + Kate Leibinger2542% games−4.5% vs expected
Melody Morris + Anna Lorenson1539% games−7.0% vs expected
Melody Morris + Chance Balis0634% games−10.7% vs expected
Ksana Oglesby + Susie Demers3446% gamesnot enough data
Kate Leibinger + Anna Lorenson1640% gamesnot enough data
Ksana Oglesby + Keely Eberly0533% gamesnot 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.

3.5
Keely Eberly
41W–78L career · 2 lines in 2022
36%64%<1%
3.05
Susie Demers
39W–41L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%79%21%
2.90
3
Ksana Oglesby
30W–37L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%89%10%
2.83
Kate Leibinger
17W–30L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Amy Treese
1W–9L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Chance Balis
3W–21L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
3
Anna Lorenson
25W–50L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.73
Melody Morris
19W–52L career · 2 lines in 2022
75%25%<1%
2.41
2.5
Debbie Birch
14W–21L career · 2 lines in 2022
0%81%19%
2.39
Judith Byrns
1W–3L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Kayla Thomson
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
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.