Teams

CSU GOLD

2022 CTA TWILIGHT - NOCO · WOMEN 3.5 - TWILIGHT - NOCO

10 players · average NTRP 3.42 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2022-09-01vs LVTA PURPLELost 01
L#2 DoublesAmy Cawrse / Leticia Dunn vs Karen Pielin / Melissa King2-6, 3-6
2022-08-30vs FCCC PINKWon 20
W#1 DoublesCamille Benton / Jill Brooks vs Kristine Clagett / Lisa Clay6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLeticia Dunn / Amy Cawrse vs Jane Gronewoller / Catherine Orr6-4, 6-7, 1-0
2022-08-22vs MLFLost 02
L#1 DoublesKim Jensen / Camille Benton vs LaRae Sehr / Samantha Gallegos2-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesBarbara Balok / Leticia Dunn vs Karen Kiser / Morgan Gordon4-6, 2-6
2022-08-15vs HMTCWon 20
W#1 SinglesLeticia Dunn vs Gina Zachman6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCamille Benton / Barbara Balok vs Cimarron Spitz / Wendy Ball6-2, 6-7, 1-0
2022-08-08vs FCCC PINKWon 10
W#1 DoublesCamille Benton / Kim Jensen vs Jane Gronewoller / Jen Guernsey7-6, 7-5
2022-08-01vs LVTA PURPLELost 01
L#1 DoublesCamille Benton / Jill Brooks vs Heidi Abrahamson / Heather Huntley6-2, 1-6, 0-1
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 WOMEN 3.5 - TWILIGHT - NOCO 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 3.23 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.

3.83
Jill Brooks
published
3.31
Kim Jensen
published
Amy Cawrse
published 3.5
Angeles Sanchez
published 3.5
3.23
Camille Benton
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.21
Brenda Stewart
published 3.5
3.08
Leticia Dunn
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.08
Rachel White
published
2.86
Nancy Pajak
published 3
Barbara Balok
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.

Jill Brooks + Camille Benton5160% gamesnot enough data
Leticia Dunn + Angeles Sanchez314 matchesnot enough data
Leticia Dunn + Kim Jensen134 matchesnot enough data
Brenda Stewart + Kim Jensen314 matchesnot enough data
Angeles Sanchez + Kim Jensen213 matchesnot 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.

Jill Brooks
79W–29L career · no lines in 2022
<1%89%10%
3.83
Kim Jensen
35W–30L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%8%
3.31
3.5
Amy Cawrse
4W–12L career · type A · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Angeles Sanchez
9W–9L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Camille Benton
106W–46L career · 5 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.23
3.5
Brenda Stewart
9W–7L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.21
3.5
Leticia Dunn
38W–55L career · 4 lines in 2022
27%73%<1%
3.08
Rachel White
7W–35L career · no lines in 2022
28%72%<1%
3.08
3
Nancy Pajak
56W–74L career · no lines in 2022
<1%86%14%
2.86
Barbara Balok
3W–11L 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.