Teams

Sports Mall-Kasteler/DowDell

2021 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 4.0W PM

24 players · average NTRP 4.09 / 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 →
Schedule5 played
W#2 SinglesSherilyn Rawlings vs Berit Campion6-3, 6-0
2021-04-29Lost 01
L#2 SinglesSherilyn Rawlings vs Lindsay Bianucci3-6, 6-3, 0-1
2021-04-24Won 10
W#1 SinglesSherilyn Rawlings vs Jordyn Parry4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2021-04-22vs CMTA @ Liberty Park-Rich/RichWon 10
W#2 SinglesSherilyn Rawlings vs Amy Powell3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2021-04-15Won 10
W#1 SinglesSherilyn Rawlings vs Jennie Hall6-0, 6-2
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 4.0W PM 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 3.72 estimated across 19 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.

4.48
Lauren Hawley
usually #1 Singles 73%, also #2 Singles 27% · published
Amy Hansen
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.09
Nanette Heath
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4.5
4.01
Adrienne Davis
usually #1 Singles 43%, also #2 Singles 43% · published 4.5
3.93
Alyson Ellis
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 40% · published 4
3.92
Emily Wallace
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
3.92
Vicky Arne
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.85
Tiffany Kasteler
usually #2 Singles 39%, also #1 Doubles 31% · published
3.78
Susan Koelliker
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published 4
3.75
JaNae Smith
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published 4
Anji DowDell
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 4
Carole Sharp
usually #3 Doubles 42%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
Cristie Briggs
usually #1 Singles 36%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published 4
3.72
Tiffany Olson
usually #3 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published
3.69
Sherilyn Rawlings
usually #2 Singles 60%, also #1 Singles 40% · published 4
3.65
Jill Ford
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.59
Annalyn Adams
usually #2 Singles 43%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.54
Brenda Fowler
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.45
Janice Smith
usually #2 Doubles 38%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published
3.40
Natalie Watts
published
3.40
Amanda Lewis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.39
Lindie Hoggan
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.14
Kristel Affleck
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Kim Warren
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Tiffany Kasteler + Annalyn Adams5069% games+17.9% vs expected
Sherilyn Rawlings + Jill Ford6159% games+13.5% vs expected
Tiffany Olson + Brenda Fowler8356% games+10.2% vs expected
Tiffany Kasteler + Kristel Affleck8461% games+7.8% vs expected
Emily Wallace + Nanette Heath351358% games+5.9% vs expected
Amanda Lewis + Kristel Affleck7652% games+5.5% vs expected
Tiffany Kasteler + Susan Koelliker311058% games+4.9% vs expected
Carole Sharp + Janice Smith21563% games+4.7% 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.

Lauren Hawley
122W–31L career · 15 lines in 2021
<1%55%45%
4.48
4.5
Amy Hansen
43W–44L career · 8 lines in 2021
not enough data
4.5
Nanette Heath
134W–74L career · 16 lines in 2021
24%76%<1%
4.09
4.5
Adrienne Davis
56W–61L career · 7 lines in 2021
48%52%<1%
4.01
4
Alyson Ellis
173W–47L career · 10 lines in 2021
<1%70%30%
3.93
4.5
Emily Wallace
93W–98L career · 14 lines in 2021
74%26%<1%
3.92
4
Vicky Arne
254W–151L career · 6 lines in 2021
<1%74%26%
3.92
Tiffany Kasteler
166W–104L career · 12 lines in 2021
<1%87%12%
3.85
4
Susan Koelliker
133W–81L career · 9 lines in 2021
1%94%5%
3.78
4
JaNae Smith
221W–188L career · 7 lines in 2021
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Anji DowDell
95W–74L career · 7 lines in 2021
not enough data
4
Carole Sharp
95W–47L career · 12 lines in 2021
not enough data
4
Cristie Briggs
75W–60L career · 10 lines in 2021
not enough data
Tiffany Olson
115W–51L career · 7 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.72
4
Sherilyn Rawlings
136W–64L career · 5 lines in 2021
7%92%1%
3.69
Jill Ford
86W–60L career · 6 lines in 2021
13%87%<1%
3.65
4
Annalyn Adams
122W–97L career · 7 lines in 2021
24%76%<1%
3.59
4
Brenda Fowler
87W–76L career · 4 lines in 2021
37%63%<1%
3.54
Janice Smith
126W–62L career · 8 lines in 2021
66%34%<1%
3.45
Natalie Watts
41W–58L career · no lines in 2021
78%22%<1%
3.40
4
Amanda Lewis
49W–31L career · 8 lines in 2021
79%21%<1%
3.40
Lindie Hoggan
58W–74L career · 6 lines in 2021
81%19%<1%
3.39
3.5
Kristel Affleck
123W–116L career · 6 lines in 2021
14%86%<1%
3.14
Kim Warren
51W–63L career · 3 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.