Teams

KY/HEN/SPENCER, Donna

2025 18 & Over SOUTHERN COMBO DOUBLES HEN · 6.5 Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.00 / KENTUCKY

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
L#1 DoublesJulie Flittner / Leah Marlow-Wedeking vs Amelia DeMello / Stacy Lambert4-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesKathy Ettensohn / Jane Diehl vs Elizabeth Ingalls / Monica Warren4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesStephanie Caton / Grace Hodge vs Jane Quehl / Tammy Rust1-6, 2-6
L#4 DoublesCatherine Bordenet / Jill Carr vs Paige Warren / Susan Crump3-6, 4-6
W#1 DoublesAmelia DeMello / Stacy Lambert vs Melanie Humbert / Donna Spencer6-4, 6-3
L#2 DoublesJulie Flittner / Kathy Ettensohn vs Penny Henkel / Elizabeth Ingalls5-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesLeah Marlow-Wedeking / Jane Diehl vs Monica Warren / Jane Quehl5-7, 4-6
L#4 DoublesStephanie Caton / Catherine Bordenet vs Dawn Dickey / Paige Warren1-6, 3-6
L#1 DoublesKathy Ettensohn / Julie Flittner vs Debra Decker / Katrina Cutshaw1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesGrace Hodge / Donna Spencer vs Penny Henkel / Elizabeth Ingalls2-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesStephanie Caton / Mary Lawrence Childs vs Stacy Lambert / Amy Clements3-6, 4-6
L#4 DoublesJill Carr / Catherine Bordenet vs Tammy Rust / Paige Warren2-6, 6-7
W#1 DoublesMelanie Humbert / Leah Marlow-Wedeking vs Susan Crump / Tammy Rust6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesJulie Flittner / Donna Spencer vs Dawn Dickey / Stacy Lambert6-4, 0-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJill Carr / Jane Diehl vs Jane Quehl / Katrina Cutshaw1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesLeah Marlow-Wedeking / Stephanie Caton vs Katrina Cutshaw / Jane Quehl6-3, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJill Carr / Mary Lawrence Childs vs Paige Warren / Dawn Dickey7-5, 6-3
W#1 DoublesMelanie Humbert / Kathy Ettensohn vs Monica Warren / Dawn Dickey6-0, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLeah Marlow-Wedeking / Grace Hodge vs Debra Decker / Katrina Cutshaw6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJane Diehl / Donna Spencer vs Susan Crump / Tammy Rust2-6, 1-6
L#4 DoublesStephanie Caton / Mary Lawrence Childs vs Amelia DeMello / Elizabeth Ingalls1-6, 5-7
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 6.5 Women 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 2.88 estimated across 12 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.

3.39
Melanie Humbert
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.38
Julie Flittner
usually #2 Doubles 63%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.96
Grace Hodge
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.95
Kathy Ettensohn
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
2.91
Amelia DeMello
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.85
Mary Lawrence Childs
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #4 Doubles 33% · published
2.79
Leah Marlow-Wedeking
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
2.77
Donna Spencer
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.67
Catherine Bordenet
usually #4 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.66
Jill Carr
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #4 Doubles 50% · published
2.66
Stephanie Caton
usually #4 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
2.54
Jane Diehl
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · 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.

Kathy Ettensohn + Amelia DeMello4546% games+1.8% vs expected
Leah Marlow-Wedeking + Amelia DeMello2838% games−3.1% vs expected
Jane Diehl + Amelia DeMello0928% games−5.1% vs expected
Jane Diehl + Kathy Ettensohn2634% gamesnot enough data
Jane Diehl + Leah Marlow-Wedeking2539% gamesnot enough data
Leah Marlow-Wedeking + Kathy Ettensohn2346% gamesnot enough data
Julie Flittner + Kathy Ettensohn134 matchesnot enough data
Catherine Bordenet + Jill Carr044 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.

Melanie Humbert
52W–26L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.39
Julie Flittner
130W–101L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.38
3
Grace Hodge
21W–16L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%61%39%
2.96
Kathy Ettensohn
51W–83L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%65%35%
2.95
3
Amelia DeMello
44W–75L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%76%24%
2.91
Mary Lawrence Childs
28W–23L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%86%13%
2.85
Leah Marlow-Wedeking
41W–95L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%94%5%
2.79
3
Donna Spencer
17W–36L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Catherine Bordenet
28W–91L career · 3 lines in 2025
10%89%<1%
2.67
Jill Carr
17W–30L career · 4 lines in 2025
10%89%<1%
2.66
Stephanie Caton
7W–33L career · 5 lines in 2025
11%89%<1%
2.66
Jane Diehl
35W–105L career · 7 lines in 2025
38%62%<1%
2.54

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.