Teams

Liberty Park-Swensen/ Benton

2026 USTA Adult 40 & Over · 4.0W AM

18 players · average NTRP 3.81 / 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 →
Schedule7 played
2026-08-06vs SunPro-Fowkes/CarterLost 02
L#1 DoublesEmily Benton / Jessica Gardner vs Megan Warren / Tiffany Pierce3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesKatie Swensen / Gretel Sampson vs Rachel Hatch / Seidi Bennett1-6, 2-6
2026-07-30Won 20
W#1 DoublesEmily Benton / Deanne Goaslind vs Renee Utgaard / Daisy Carlson1-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesGretel Sampson / Alisa Gardner vs Donna Pizza / Teri Bishop6-2, 6-2
2026-07-23Lost 01
L#2 DoublesJessica Gardner / Heather Hayes vs Tara Wood / Jennifer Jensen6-2, 2-6, 0-1
2026-07-16vs SunPro-Blackhurst/MayberrySplit 11
W#1 DoublesDeanne Goaslind / Mindy Dunyon vs Kim Santiago / Michelle Ainge6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesEmily Benton / Gretel Sampson vs Tyra Cook / Jill Ford4-6, 6-7
2026-07-02vs SunPro-Fowkes/CarterSplit 11
W#1 DoublesEmily Benton / Jessica Gardner vs Megan Warren / Shauna Carter6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKatie Swensen / Heather Hayes vs Kim Halladay / Seidi Bennett1-6, 2-6
2026-06-26Lost 01
L#2 DoublesAnnette Knight / Heather Hayes vs Misty Morrow / Renee Utgaard6-7, 4-6
2026-06-18vs Eagleridge-Mower/PriceSplit 11
W#1 DoublesMindy Dunyon / Deanne Goaslind vs Jenni Price / Jessica Olsen5-7, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesHeather Hayes / Annette Knight vs Michele Halls / Amy Johnson4-6, 2-6
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 standings3 teams · 4.0W AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SunPro-Fowkes/Carter7124822256
2Sports Mall-Brown/Cutrer53221032273
3Liberty Park-Swensen/ Benton17112148339

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 3.49 estimated across 17 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.

3.96
Alisa Gardner
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published 4
3.75
Amy Earl
usually #1 Singles 38%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.72
Tina Marriott
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.67
Mindy Dunyon
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.66
Emily Benton
usually #1 Doubles 73%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published 4
3.65
Deanne Goaslind
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.63
Annette Knight
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.55
Katie Swensen
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.53
Janee Roper
published 4
3.48
Jessica Gardner
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.37
Gretel Sampson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.28
Diane Creamer
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.28
Heather Hayes
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.26
Alena Taylor
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.26
Jennifer Wecker
usually #3 Doubles 36%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published
3.18
Kristen Okland
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.16
Manal Hall
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Singles 43% · published 3.5
Sara Green
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.

Annette Knight + Emily Benton4264% games+15.0% vs expected
Gretel Sampson + Alisa Gardner11366% games+14.1% vs expected
Amy Earl + Alisa Gardner19369% games+11.7% vs expected
Jessica Gardner + Alisa Gardner8160% games+10.1% vs expected
Emily Benton + Alisa Gardner11266% games+9.5% vs expected
Manal Hall + Jennifer Wecker4255% games+8.9% vs expected
Jessica Gardner + Gretel Sampson5752% games+8.9% vs expected
Amy Earl + Emily Benton3358% games+7.7% 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.

4
Alisa Gardner
197W–48L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%63%37%
3.96
4
Amy Earl
108W–46L career · 8 lines in 2026
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Tina Marriott
40W–42L career · 5 lines in 2026
5%94%1%
3.72
4
Mindy Dunyon
121W–85L career · 2 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.67
4
Emily Benton
148W–120L career · 11 lines in 2026
11%89%<1%
3.66
4
Deanne Goaslind
62W–58L career · 3 lines in 2026
12%87%<1%
3.65
4
Annette Knight
58W–66L career · 3 lines in 2026
15%84%<1%
3.63
Katie Swensen
102W–84L career · 8 lines in 2026
36%64%<1%
3.55
4
Janee Roper
146W–123L career · type A · no lines in 2026
40%60%<1%
3.53
Jessica Gardner
81W–71L career · 3 lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
3.48
3.5
Gretel Sampson
200W–198L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%85%15%
3.37
3.5
Diane Creamer
116W–110L career · 5 lines in 2026
2%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Heather Hayes
84W–67L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.28
3.5
Alena Taylor
174W–200L career · 10 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
3.26
Jennifer Wecker
92W–47L career · 14 lines in 2026
2%95%3%
3.26
Kristen Okland
79W–74L career · 8 lines in 2026
8%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Manal Hall
111W–167L career · 7 lines in 2026
11%89%<1%
3.16
Sara Green
25W–70L 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.