Teams

SpringPark RED/S. Nolen W2.5S

2025 DALLAS TENNIS 18 & Over ADULT S · S W. Saturday League

9 players · average NTRP 2.62 / TEXAS

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 →
Schedule5 played
2025-06-28vs Greenhill/McGinley W2.5SWon 10
W#2 DoublesLisa Campbell / Seema Rao vs Erin Miller / Sara Mcmath6-1, 6-3
2025-06-07vs RGAC BLUE/J. Molina W2.5SLost 01
L#2 DoublesChristina Eubanks / Alissa van Komen vs Luzadriana Giannini / Ellen Palmer2-6, 1-6
2025-05-17vs Greenhill/McGinley W2.5SLost 02
L#1 SinglesChristina Eubanks vs Christi Young0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesEllen Braht / Alissa van Komen vs Angela Sharp / Michelle Sickles2-6, 6-7
2025-05-10vs RGAC RED/J. Molina W2.5SWon 10
W#1 SinglesSeema Rao vs Annette Rice6-1, 6-0
2025-04-26vs RGAC BLUE/J. Molina W2.5SWon 10
W#2 DoublesChristina Eubanks / Dinnah Dent vs Maria Andrea Gelves Kerguelen / Cameron Stone0-6, 6-2, 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 S W. Saturday League 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 2.29 estimated across 4 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.

2.88
Cheyenne Harward
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.27
Amy Zuniga
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
2.06
Alissa van Komen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
1.96
Christina Eubanks
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 2.5
Dinnah Dent
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Ellen Braht
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Lauren Klein
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Singles 29% · published
Seema Rao
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Tori Kimmel
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · 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.

Alissa van Komen + Ellen Braht2543% gamesnot enough data
Cheyenne Harward + Tori Kimmel3255% gamesnot enough data
Amy Zuniga + Ellen Braht044 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
Cheyenne Harward
8W–19L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%80%20%
2.88
2.5
Amy Zuniga
5W–11L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%95%5%
2.27
2.5
Alissa van Komen
5W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.06
2.5
Christina Eubanks
1W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
1.96
Dinnah Dent
1W–0L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Ellen Braht
8W–19L career · 9 lines in 2025
not enough data
Lauren Klein
14W–16L career · 7 lines in 2025
not enough data
Seema Rao
3W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tori Kimmel
4W–3L career · 5 lines in 2025
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.