CM GREEN
2025 CTA WOMEN'S 2.5 - DEN · WOMEN 2.5 - DEN
9 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.
Schedule7 played
i
Flight standings90 teams · WOMEN 2.5 - DEN
| Team | W | L | Sets lost | Games lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1MC RED | 7 | 0 | 10 | 125 |
| 2EM TEAL | 7 | 0 | 10 | 128 |
| 3EM NAVY | 7 | 0 | 12 | 151 |
| 4KC-CC TEAL | 7 | 0 | 12 | 135 |
| 5CHCC NAVY | 7 | 0 | 13 | 121 |
| 6CPCC YELLOW | 7 | 0 | 19 | 172 |
| 7CACM RED | 6 | 1 | 9 | 121 |
| 8DTC ORANGE | 6 | 1 | 11 | 119 |
| 9HW YELLOW | 6 | 1 | 13 | 143 |
| 10CM BLUE | 6 | 1 | 15 | 143 |
| 11DTP YELLOW | 6 | 1 | 15 | 144 |
| 12KC-RH NAVY | 6 | 1 | 16 | 156 |
| 13WC NAVY | 5 | 1 | 11 | 132 |
| 14EM GREEN | 5 | 1 | 14 | 143 |
| 15VC TEAL | 5 | 2 | 12 | 137 |
| 16WC GREEN | 5 | 2 | 14 | 146 |
| 17BCST BLUE | 5 | 2 | 16 | 150 |
| 18VCC GREEN | 5 | 2 | 16 | 156 |
| 19RCC GREEN | 5 | 2 | 18 | 165 |
| 20WP YELLOW | 5 | 2 | 18 | 152 |
| 21SS-H YELLOW | 5 | 2 | 20 | 181 |
| 22BRMST TEAL | 5 | 2 | 20 | 161 |
| 23NJ GREEN | 5 | 2 | 21 | 182 |
| 24VC BLUE | 5 | 2 | 21 | 194 |
| 25NJ PURPLE | 5 | 2 | 22 | 195 |
| 26VCC RED | 4 | 2 | 22 | 171 |
| 27SS-LT NAVY | 4 | 3 | 14 | 149 |
| 28CCV RED | 4 | 3 | 17 | 145 |
| 29HV GREEN | 4 | 3 | 18 | 157 |
| 30BCST RED | 4 | 3 | 18 | 146 |
| 31HF YELLOW | 4 | 3 | 19 | 163 |
| 32CM GREEN | 4 | 3 | 20 | 149 |
| 33MEA GREEN | 4 | 3 | 20 | 184 |
| 34SS-D PURPLE | 4 | 3 | 20 | 168 |
| 35HV ORANGE | 4 | 3 | 20 | 159 |
| 36RMTC TEAL | 4 | 3 | 20 | 169 |
| 37DTC RED | 4 | 3 | 21 | 184 |
| 38BM RED | 4 | 3 | 21 | 190 |
| 39GCC BLUE | 4 | 3 | 21 | 175 |
| 40WP-C ORANGE | 4 | 3 | 21 | 157 |
| 41RCC BLUE | 4 | 3 | 22 | 154 |
| 42CVTA TEAL | 4 | 3 | 22 | 170 |
| 43CCC PINK | 4 | 3 | 22 | 169 |
| 44GAC RED | 4 | 3 | 23 | 205 |
| 45PH GREEN | 4 | 3 | 23 | 159 |
| 46RRTC NAVY | 4 | 3 | 24 | 173 |
| 47RHCC BLUE | 4 | 3 | 25 | 184 |
| 48SS-LGT RED | 4 | 3 | 26 | 207 |
| 49LTFC PINK | 3 | 3 | 21 | 162 |
| 50BRMST NAVY | 3 | 4 | 20 | 167 |
| 51RHCC RED | 3 | 4 | 20 | 156 |
| 52CCV BLUE | 3 | 4 | 21 | 156 |
| 53GCC RED | 3 | 4 | 23 | 171 |
| 54WP-G GREEN | 3 | 4 | 24 | 198 |
| 55CCC ORANGE | 3 | 4 | 25 | 173 |
| 56KC-RH BLUE | 3 | 4 | 26 | 191 |
| 57GTC BLUE | 3 | 4 | 27 | 201 |
| 58BM GREEN | 3 | 4 | 28 | 216 |
| 59WP-O BLUE | 3 | 4 | 28 | 195 |
| 60BM PURPLE | 3 | 4 | 28 | 214 |
| 61GR RED | 3 | 4 | 29 | 207 |
| 62HW GREEN | 3 | 4 | 33 | 215 |
| 63SS-LT GREEN | 2 | 4 | 19 | 154 |
| 64HG RED | 2 | 4 | 24 | 174 |
| 65HFII RED | 2 | 5 | 25 | 193 |
| 66MVCC GREEN | 2 | 5 | 26 | 206 |
| 67FOX RED | 2 | 5 | 27 | 192 |
| 68LEBTC RED | 2 | 5 | 27 | 200 |
| 69HG GREEN | 2 | 5 | 30 | 203 |
| 70FOX BLUE | 2 | 5 | 30 | 221 |
| 71HV PURPLE | 2 | 5 | 30 | 209 |
| 72SS-LT YELLOW | 2 | 5 | 31 | 225 |
| 73CVTA PURPLE | 2 | 5 | 34 | 229 |
| 74GPTC SILVER | 2 | 5 | 34 | 225 |
| 75KC-CC RED | 1 | 6 | 27 | 198 |
| 76PTC RED | 1 | 6 | 28 | 202 |
| 77SKY RED | 1 | 6 | 30 | 217 |
| 78SKY BLUE | 1 | 6 | 30 | 214 |
| 79CPV BLUE | 1 | 6 | 30 | 207 |
| 80BP ORANGE | 1 | 6 | 30 | 211 |
| 81SS-H TEAL | 1 | 6 | 32 | 226 |
| 82LTC-D TEAL | 1 | 6 | 32 | 221 |
| 83HRCA-S TEAL | 1 | 6 | 33 | 218 |
| 84GR BLUE | 1 | 6 | 34 | 219 |
| 85WP-G NAVY | 1 | 6 | 38 | 243 |
| 86CCV GREEN | 0 | 6 | 30 | 197 |
| 87GR YELLOW | 0 | 7 | 36 | 227 |
| 88EM RED | 0 | 7 | 38 | 232 |
| 89WP-O NAVY | 0 | 7 | 39 | 240 |
| 90EM BLUE | 0 | 7 | 40 | 246 |
Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.
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 2.45 estimated across 9 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.
Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.
| Ellen Putze + Bethany Chang | 8–3 | 64% games | +7.7% vs expected |
| Candace Johnson + Ellen Sarcone | 3–2 | 51% games | +1.6% vs expected |
| Candace Johnson + Emily Cook | 1–3 | 4 matches | not enough data |
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.
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.