Teams

Thompson/LF

2021 TUL ADULT 18 & Over Day League · 3.0 WOMEN-DAY

13 players · average NTRP 3.10 / OKLAHOMA

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
2020-11-16vs Endsley/PHLost 05
L#1 DoublesSandy Thompson / Colleen Sanders vs Jill Jmaeff / Gayle Roberts-Pisklo7-6, 6-7, 0-1
L#1 SinglesLeigh Roy vs Chelsea Richardson2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesKaren Forbes / Annabelle DeMoss vs Ginger Coffey / Janis Taylor2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 SinglesMeagan Jacobs-Irwin vs Ginger Penn3-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesChristina Mamalis / Kathy Roberts vs Christina Richey / Tiffany McCrackin4-6, 4-6
2020-10-26vs Cyran/ISLost 23
W#1 DoublesColleen Sanders / Annabelle DeMoss vs Kathy Wolber / Christina Fowler7-6, 3-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesMeagan Jacobs-Irwin vs Lorna Fuller1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesKathy Roberts / Donna Kraybill vs Sandra Epperly / Gayle Johnson0-6, 2-6
W#2 SinglesChristina Mamalis vs Tammy Mattox6-2, 6-3
L#3 DoublesAlexis Hubble / Deborah Lee vs Jenni Hutchins / Stephanie Johnson2-6, 1-6
2020-10-12vs SHCC Blue/SHLost 23
L#1 DoublesDeborah Lee / Christina Mamalis vs Julie Wood / Amanda Stone6-3, 3-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesValerie Santiago vs Crystal Stovall6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesMeagan Jacobs-Irwin / Colleen Sanders vs Heather May / Angel Kymes6-1, 6-1
L#2 SinglesAlexis Hubble vs Cyndy Phillips3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesKaren Forbes / Annabelle DeMoss vs Katie Arens / Cindie Milford2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2020-10-05vs Liesl Jones/TTCLost 14
L#1 DoublesValerie Santiago / Alexis Hubble vs Mary Lou Doudican / Sue Zeng0-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesLeigh Roy vs Liesl Jones1-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesChristina Mamalis / Colleen Sanders vs Jan Girouard / Deidra Kirtley6-4, 6-4
L#2 SinglesAnnabelle DeMoss vs Terrie Shipley2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesMeagan Jacobs-Irwin / Karen Forbes vs Susie Collins Hentschel / Patricia Lederman4-6, 2-6
2020-09-28vs Endsley/PHWon 40
W#1 DoublesValerie Santiago / Alexis Hubble vs Ginger Ford / Janis Taylor6-0, 6-0
W#1 SinglesLeigh Roy vs Malisa Nell7-6, 6-3
W#2 SinglesAnnabelle DeMoss vs Ginger Penn4-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#3 DoublesChristina Mamalis / Colleen Sanders vs Tiffany McCrackin / Christina Richey6-3, 6-0
2020-08-31vs Sacra/LFLost 05
L#1 DoublesMeagan Jacobs-Irwin / Colleen Sanders vs Laura Keep / Shirley Miley5-7, 3-6
L#1 SinglesAnnabelle DeMoss vs Kelly Rhodes6-7, 1-6
L#2 DoublesKaren Forbes / Christina Mamalis vs Henri Sabin / Janet Rader6-7, 3-6
L#2 SinglesSandy Thompson vs Rochelle Cordray0-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesFaith Conaway / Kathy Roberts vs Leah Gajan / Jean Sacra2-6, 3-6
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 3.0 WOMEN-DAY 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 2.87 estimated across 6 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.

3.28
Valerie Santiago
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.11
Colleen Sanders
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.00
Sandy Thompson
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.92
Alexis Hubble
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3
Deborah Lee
published 3
Faith Conaway
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.63
Christina Mamalis
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.28
Karen Forbes
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Annabelle DeMoss
usually #2 Singles 33%, also #1 Singles 17% · published
Donna Kraybill
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Kathy Roberts
published
Leigh Roy
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Meagan Jacobs-Irwin
usually #1 Doubles 20%, also #2 Singles 20% · 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.

Alexis Hubble + Valerie Santiago232352% games+2.5% vs expected
Meagan Jacobs-Irwin + Alexis Hubble4255% games+1.7% vs expected
Sandy Thompson + Colleen Sanders2450% games−0.1% vs expected
Leigh Roy + Sandy Thompson1536% games−3.1% vs expected
Karen Forbes + Meagan Jacobs-Irwin0531% games−12.0% vs expected
Karen Forbes + Christina Mamalis1444% gamesnot enough data
Sandy Thompson + Christina Mamalis224 matchesnot enough data
Kathy Roberts + Donna Kraybill123 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.

Valerie Santiago
65W–41L career · 3 lines in 2021
1%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Colleen Sanders
128W–123L career · 6 lines in 2021
21%79%<1%
3.11
Sandy Thompson
44W–91L career · 2 lines in 2021
50%50%<1%
3.00
3
Alexis Hubble
48W–55L career · 4 lines in 2021
<1%74%26%
2.92
3
Deborah Lee
17W–25L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
3
Faith Conaway
7W–29L career · 1 line in 2021
not enough data
3
Christina Mamalis
23W–28L career · 6 lines in 2021
16%84%<1%
2.63
Karen Forbes
35W–77L career · 4 lines in 2021
96%4%<1%
2.28
Annabelle DeMoss
2W–4L career · 5 lines in 2021
not enough data
Donna Kraybill
17W–31L career · 3 lines in 2021
not enough data
Kathy Roberts
30W–42L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Leigh Roy
17W–56L career · 3 lines in 2021
not enough data
Meagan Jacobs-Irwin
55W–76L career · 4 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.