Teams

Liberty Park Tennis-Kemp

2024 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 4.5W AM

18 players · average NTRP 4.31 / 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 →
Schedule4 played
2024-05-20vs Ivory Ridge-Langston/ConradSplit 11
W#2 DoublesJessica Olsen / Emily Bott vs Christy Owens / Amy Black6-4, 7-5
L#3 DoublesCarlene Kemp / Jackie Parker vs Michelle Rawstorne / Tricia Sederberg2-6, 2-6
2024-04-22vs Sunpro-Allen/SeegmillerWon 10
W#1 DoublesJessica Olsen / Emily Bott vs Kaori Allen / Marci Seegmiller3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2024-04-15vs Ivory Ridge-Langston/ConradLost 01
L#2 DoublesMerri Gillespie / Jennifer Rasmussen vs Rachelle Tempest / Sarah Blake3-6, 2-6
2024-04-08Won 10
W#2 DoublesJessica Olsen / Emily Bott vs JaNae Smith / Linda Marz6-4, 6-7, 1-0
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 4.5W AM 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 3.83 estimated across 15 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.

4.27
Cyndi Jones
usually #1 Singles 61%, also #2 Singles 28% · published 4.5
Elizabeth Vigil
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.24
Emily Bott
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.00
Kandice Taylor
usually #1 Doubles 39%, also #2 Doubles 31% · published 4.5
3.99
Kathy Miller-Rees
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 35% · published 4.5
3.92
Emily Wallace
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
3.89
Cathy Davis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.88
Staci McCubbins
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.82
Carlene Kemp
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 4.5
3.72
Jackie Parker
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.66
Lee Chase
published
3.65
Heidi Brophy
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.61
Michelle Moscon
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.60
Jennifer Rasmussen
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.60
Amy Johnson
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.54
Jessica Olsen
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
Janine Nesseth
usually #1 Singles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Merri Gillespie
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Lee Chase + Kathy Miller-Rees4264% games+9.4% vs expected
Carlene Kemp + Emily Wallace3940% games+3.4% vs expected
Jessica Olsen + Emily Bott272451% games+2.8% vs expected
Staci McCubbins + Kandice Taylor2444% games+2.7% vs expected
Cyndi Jones + Kandice Taylor4253% games+2.6% vs expected
Merri Gillespie + Jennifer Rasmussen2449% games+2.2% vs expected
Amy Johnson + Jessica Olsen91048% games+1.8% vs expected
Merri Gillespie + Kandice Taylor5253% games+1.3% 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
Cyndi Jones
154W–124L career · 18 lines in 2024
2%94%4%
4.27
4.5
Elizabeth Vigil
97W–75L career · 8 lines in 2024
not enough data
4.5
Emily Bott
50W–44L career · 3 lines in 2024
3%95%2%
4.24
4.5
Kandice Taylor
152W–168L career · 13 lines in 2024
48%52%<1%
4.00
4.5
Kathy Miller-Rees
150W–147L career · 20 lines in 2024
53%47%<1%
3.99
4.5
Emily Wallace
93W–98L career · 6 lines in 2024
74%26%<1%
3.92
4.5
Cathy Davis
54W–88L career · 6 lines in 2024
80%20%<1%
3.89
4
Staci McCubbins
69W–103L career · 9 lines in 2024
<1%82%18%
3.88
4.5
Carlene Kemp
58W–195L career · 6 lines in 2024
92%8%<1%
3.82
4
Jackie Parker
53W–76L career · 1 line in 2024
5%94%1%
3.72
Lee Chase
49W–33L career · no lines in 2024
11%89%<1%
3.66
4
Heidi Brophy
76W–55L career · 3 lines in 2024
13%87%<1%
3.65
4
Michelle Moscon
90W–148L career · 8 lines in 2024
21%79%<1%
3.61
Jennifer Rasmussen
43W–77L career · 6 lines in 2024
21%79%<1%
3.60
4
Amy Johnson
68W–89L career · 4 lines in 2024
23%77%<1%
3.60
Jessica Olsen
72W–87L career · 5 lines in 2024
38%62%<1%
3.54
Janine Nesseth
29W–57L career · 5 lines in 2024
not enough data
Merri Gillespie
47W–77L career · 1 line in 2024
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.