Teams

LCTA40/Koepenick/Wild Dunes

Other 40 & Over Singles League · 40 & over Singles Women 3.5

10 players · average NTRP 3.19 / SOUTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-06-11Lost 01
L#3 SinglesAshley Gaston vs Heather Williams1-6, 1-6
2026-06-07vs LCTA40/RICHTER/ MPRWon 21
W#1 SinglesAmanda Lesesne vs Heather Williams3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 SinglesHeather Koepenick vs Sarah Simmonite6-4, 6-0
L#3 SinglesAshley Gaston vs Heidi Richter2-6, 1-6
2026-05-17vs LCTA40/RICHTER/ MPRLost 01
L#1 SinglesElizabeth Jackson vs Virginie Murphy0-6, 6-1, 1-0
2026-05-09vs LCTA40/RICHTER/ MPRWon 10
W#3 SinglesCarrie Riddle vs Heather Ley6-0, 6-7, 1-0
2026-05-03vs LCTA40/RICHTER/ MPRLost 12
W#1 SinglesHeather Koepenick vs Sarah Simmonite6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 SinglesAmanda Lesesne vs Betsy Hopkins6-7, 3-6
L#3 SinglesElizabeth Jackson vs Virginie Murphy6-3, 2-6, 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 standings2 teams · 40 & over Singles Women 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1LCTA40/Koepenick/Wild Dunes329618125
2LCTA40/RICHTER/ MPR236920132

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 2.91 estimated across 8 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.

3.40
Heather Koepenick
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3.5
Amy West
published 3.5
3.17
Elizabeth Callahan
published 3.5
3.07
Elizabeth Jackson
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published 3
2.95
Amanda Lesesne
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
2.76
Carrie Riddle
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.69
Ashley Gaston
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.66
Mallory Joiner
published
2.58
Dede Davidson
published 3
Kimberly Moore
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.

Heather Koepenick + Elizabeth Jackson7063% gamesnot enough data
Ashley Gaston + Carrie Riddle314 matchesnot enough data
Heather Koepenick + Ashley Gaston213 matchesnot enough data
Dede Davidson + Carrie Riddle123 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.

3.5
Heather Koepenick
73W–27L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%78%22%
3.40
3.5
Amy West
40W–10L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Elizabeth Callahan
18W–27L career · no lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.17
3
Elizabeth Jackson
45W–38L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%29%71%
3.07
3
Amanda Lesesne
6W–3L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
<1%66%34%
2.95
3
Carrie Riddle
38W–29L career · 1 line in 2026
2%94%3%
2.76
3
Ashley Gaston
41W–34L career · 2 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
2.69
Mallory Joiner
12W–4L career · no lines in 2026
11%89%<1%
2.66
3
Dede Davidson
40W–29L career · no lines in 2026
26%74%<1%
2.58
Kimberly Moore
22W–10L career · no lines in 2026
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.