Teams

KY/OWB/CLAYTON

2022 USTA ADULT 18 & OVER REGIONAL · 4.0 Women WK Combined

9 players · average NTRP 4.00 / 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 →
Schedule4 played
2022-05-15vs KY/BG/FEEWon 31
W#1 DoublesBrenda Clayton / Sarah Brown vs Minda Schafer / Julie Isaac7-5, 6-4
W#1 SinglesCaroline Hayden vs Lauren Wiseman6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMary Jochim / Kerry Bodenheimer vs Gabrielle Springs / Jaymie Roberts7-5, 6-2
L#2 SinglesKatie Cecil vs Samantha Springs6-1, 5-7, 0-1
2022-05-15vs KY/BG/FEESplit 22
L#1 DoublesSarah Brown / Katie Cecil vs Lauren Wiseman / Jaymie Roberts6-7, 5-7
W#1 SinglesCaroline Hayden vs Trina Rickard6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesBrenda Clayton / Mary Jochim vs Sarah Nuse / Julie Isaac6-2, 6-2
L#2 SinglesKerry Bodenheimer vs Martina Fee2-6, 2-6
2022-04-24vs KY/BG/FEEWon 50
W#1 DoublesChristine Clements / Sandra Barnes vs Michelle Elkins / MacKenzie Elkins6-1, 6-0
W#1 SinglesCaroline Hayden vs Samantha Springs6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesSarah Brown / Brenda Clayton vs Martina Fee / Melissa Kohl6-1, 6-0
W#2 SinglesLauren Patmore vs Jaymie Roberts6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKerry Bodenheimer / Stephanie Gray vs Joan Douglas / Gabrielle Springs7-6, 6-4
2022-04-24vs KY/BG/FEEWon 40
W#1 DoublesSarah Brown / Brenda Clayton vs Jaymie Roberts / Joan Douglas6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesChristine Clements / Stephanie Gray vs Michelle Elkins / Melissa Kohl6-0, 6-2
W#2 SinglesCaroline Hayden vs MacKenzie Elkins6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesKerry Bodenheimer / Lauren Patmore vs Gabrielle Springs / Samantha Springs7-5, 6-4
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 · 4.0 Women WK Combined
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1KY/OWB/CLAYTON3115510134
2KY/BG/FEE1351531210

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 3.70 estimated across 5 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.

3.87
Christine Clements
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
Caroline Hayden
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 4
3.74
Lauren Patmore
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.64
Brenda Clayton
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.64
Mary Jochim
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.62
Kerry Bodenheimer
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Katie Cecil
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Sandra Barnes
published
Stephanie Gray
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Stephanie Gray + Lauren Patmore5256% games+11.4% vs expected
Mary Jochim + Christine Clements12462% games+10.3% vs expected
Kerry Bodenheimer + Brenda Clayton5551% games−0.5% vs expected
Stephanie Gray + Kerry Bodenheimer1536% gamesnot enough data
Mary Jochim + Brenda Clayton3255% gamesnot enough data
Stephanie Gray + Brenda Clayton123 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.

4
Christine Clements
48W–21L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%85%15%
3.87
4
Caroline Hayden
10W–1L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Lauren Patmore
12W–5L career · 2 lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.74
4
Brenda Clayton
25W–18L career · 4 lines in 2022
14%85%<1%
3.64
Mary Jochim
50W–30L career · 2 lines in 2022
15%85%<1%
3.64
Kerry Bodenheimer
14W–24L career · 4 lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
3.62
Katie Cecil
2W–4L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sandra Barnes
33W–16L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Stephanie Gray
13W–13L career · 2 lines in 2022
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.