Teams

DTP BLUE

2024 CTA TWILIGHT - DEN · WOMEN 3.0 - TWILIGHT

10 players · average NTRP 2.88 / COLORADO

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
2024-09-02vs SKY BLUELost 01
L#1 DoublesMelissa Benavidez / Soudabeh Kargar vs Rachel Byrne / Katie Garrison2-6, 5-7
2024-08-30vs ATC BLUELost 01
L#1 DoublesMelissa Benavidez / Valerie Kilzer vs Kim Bolt / Molly DiCarlo1-6, 6-4, 0-1
2024-08-21vs CACM REDSplit 11
W#1 SinglesSoudabeh Kargar vs Britt Nielsen6-1, 6-2
L#2 DoublesValerie Kilzer / Jane Harmon vs Elizabeth Anderman / Julie McClung0-6, 4-6
2024-08-17vs WP-G ORANGESplit 11
W#1 DoublesSoudabeh Kargar / Melissa Benavidez vs Theresa Albyn / Zena Ballas7-5, 7-5
L#2 DoublesPeggy Moody / Valerie Kilzer vs Traci Winborne / AnnMarie Morrison4-6, 6-1, 0-1
2024-08-12vs WP REDWon 10
W#2 DoublesAnne Beletic / Peggy Moody vs Cameran Jewell / Kate Harvey7-5, 2-6, 1-0
2024-07-29vs CACM YELLOWWon 10
W#2 DoublesValerie Kilzer / Jane Harmon vs Stephanie Bolsei / Carly Schwab4-6, 6-4, 1-0
2024-07-22vs EM PINKSplit 11
L#1 DoublesAnne Beletic / Maureen Clarke vs Lisa Ide / Beth Toth4-6, 3-6
W#1 SinglesSoudabeh Kargar vs Sarah Odland6-1, 6-1
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 WOMEN 3.0 - TWILIGHT 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 2.71 estimated across 7 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.

3.12
Christin Hanley
published 3
2.88
Anne Beletic
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.84
Soudabeh Kargar
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.63
Jane Harmon
published
2.60
Maureen Clarke
published
2.47
Valerie Kilzer
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
2.46
Peggy Moody
published
Melissa Benavidez
published
Shelly Wesner
published
Suzann Gobis
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.

Anne Beletic + Peggy Moody2341% gamesnot enough data
Maureen Clarke + Shelly Wesner303 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
Christin Hanley
11W–10L career · no lines in 2024
<1%20%80%
3.12
3
Anne Beletic
69W–78L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%80%19%
2.88
3
Soudabeh Kargar
18W–31L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%86%13%
2.84
Jane Harmon
11W–15L career · no lines in 2024
17%82%<1%
2.63
Maureen Clarke
8W–17L career · no lines in 2024
24%75%<1%
2.60
2.5
Valerie Kilzer
23W–72L career · 4 lines in 2024
0%59%41%
2.47
Peggy Moody
9W–17L career · no lines in 2024
62%38%<1%
2.46
Melissa Benavidez
3W–9L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Shelly Wesner
3W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Suzann Gobis
3W–9L career · no lines in 2024
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.