Teams

Leslie Echols

2025 Springfield Adult 18 & Over 3.5-4.5 Tri-Level · 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.75 / MISSOURI

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-10-07vs MO/Kim/Tri-level3.5-4.5WomenLost 03
L#1 DoublesMacY Mathew / Melissa Goodman vs Amy Mathew / Brittany Osborne6-7, 7-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesTami Murphy / Leslie Echols vs Hee-Sun Kim / Kelly Kramer5-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesCarol Rollins / Lori Hunt vs Stephanie Wachob / Laura Greene-Johnson2-6, 0-6
2025-10-07vs MO/Kim/Tri-level3.5-4.5WomenLost 12
L#1 DoublesMacY Mathew / Melissa Goodman vs Amy Mathew / Brittany Osborne2-6, 6-0, 0-1
W#2 DoublesLeslie Echols / Carmen Broadbent vs Hee-Sun Kim / Christina Britt7-6, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesTami Murphy / Carol Rollins vs Stephanie Wachob / Laura Greene-Johnson2-6, 2-6
2025-10-07vs MO/Kim/Tri-level3.5-4.5WomenWon 21
W#1 DoublesMacY Mathew / Melissa Goodman vs Amy Mathew / Brittany Osborne6-2, 0-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesLeslie Echols / Carmen Broadbent vs Christina Johnson / Kelly Kramer6-2, 7-5
L#3 DoublesTami Murphy / Katherine Vandeven vs Debbie Pell / Kara Spiva3-6, 7-6, 0-1
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 standings2 teams · 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MO/Kim/Tri-level3.5-4.5Women2163975
2Leslie Echols12361498

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 3.61 estimated across 8 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
Pritha Prasad
published
3.95
Jena Dick
published
3.76
MacY Mathew
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.67
Carmen Broadbent
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.56
Leslie Echols
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.50
Katherine Vandeven
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.34
Tami Murphy
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.12
Carol Rollins
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Lori Hunt
published
Melissa Goodman
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.

Carmen Broadbent + Leslie Echols9452% games+1.7% vs expected
Tami Murphy + Leslie Echols4254% games−2.8% vs expected
Pritha Prasad + Jena Dick81150% games−2.9% vs expected
Lori Hunt + Tami Murphy044 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.

Pritha Prasad
89W–89L career · no lines in 2025
64%36%<1%
3.96
Jena Dick
80W–63L career · no lines in 2025
64%36%<1%
3.95
MacY Mathew
34W–64L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
3.76
4
Carmen Broadbent
31W–22L career · 2 lines in 2025
10%90%1%
3.67
Leslie Echols
111W–71L career · 3 lines in 2025
33%67%<1%
3.56
Katherine Vandeven
27W–19L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%50%50%
3.50
Tami Murphy
79W–55L career · 3 lines in 2025
89%11%<1%
3.34
3.5
Carol Rollins
40W–47L career · 2 lines in 2025
19%81%<1%
3.12
Lori Hunt
16W–9L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Melissa Goodman
12W–23L career · no 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.