Teams

Playing Nood

2026 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 5.0W

13 players · average NTRP 4.75 / UTAH

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
2026-06-13vs Utah/Jenkins/18&Over/5.0WLost 12
W#1 DoublesAdrien Jenkins / Megan Dorny vs Kristina Doerr / Jocelyn Sigety6-3, 6-3
L#1 SinglesSarah Porter vs Alysha Damron2-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesStella Jones / Amanda Pratzel vs Keyara Adamson / Kassia Lee5-7, 4-6
2026-06-06vs Looney Toons 10S TeamWon 30
W#1 DoublesAmanda Pratzel / Meagan Seay vs MacY Richards / Ashley Tanner6-0, 6-0
W#1 SinglesAdrien Jenkins vs Megan Horter6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesMegan Dorny / Katherine Rist vs Amy Woolley / Patrice Duvernay6-0, 6-0
2026-06-03vs Utah/Jenkins/18&Over/5.0WLost 12
W#1 DoublesMegan Dorny / Amanda Pratzel vs Keyara Adamson / Kassia Lee6-0, 6-1
L#1 SinglesAdrien Jenkins vs Alexandra Johncock2-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesLindsay Swenson / Meagan Seay vs Kristina Doerr / Jocelyn Sigety6-4, 0-6, 0-1
2026-05-14vs Looney Toons 10S TeamWon 20
W#1 DoublesAmanda Pratzel / Adrien Jenkins vs Toon Hobbs / Sophie Pearson7-6, 7-6
W#1 SinglesLindsay Swenson vs Kyra Harames6-2, 7-5
2026-05-09vs Utah/Jenkins/18&Over/5.0WWon 21
W#1 DoublesAngela Jewell / Adrien Jenkins vs Megan Fobair / Jocelyn Sigety7-6, 6-3
L#1 SinglesLindsay Swenson vs Kristina Doerr2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesMegan Dorny / Amanda Pratzel vs Keyara Adamson / Kassia Lee6-2, 6-3
2026-04-25vs Looney Toons 10S TeamWon 30
W#1 DoublesAmanda Pratzel / Megan Dorny vs Ashley Tanner / Adriene Pavek6-0, 6-1
W#1 SinglesLindsay Swenson vs Megan Horter6-4, 6-0
W#2 DoublesAngela Jewell / Meagan Seay vs MacY Richards / Toon Hobbs6-1, 6-4
2026-04-18vs Utah/Jenkins/18&Over/5.0WLost 12
L#1 DoublesAdrien Jenkins / Amanda Pratzel vs Jocelyn Sigety / Kristina Doerr6-0, 4-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesLindsay Swenson vs Kassia Lee6-3, 6-0
L#2 DoublesAngela Jewell / Meagan Seay vs Tori Hitz / Keyara Adamson3-6, 6-1, 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 standings3 teams · 5.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Utah/Jenkins/18&Over/5.0W7117721191
2Playing Nood4314714133
3Looney Toons 10S Team0721938231

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 4.59 estimated across 10 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.

5.00
Amanda Pratzel
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 5
4.93
Megan Dorny
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
4.79
Adrien Jenkins
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 5
4.73
Angela Jewell
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 5
4.63
Lindsay Swenson
usually #1 Singles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
4.60
Meagan Seay
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
4.48
Janine Petersen
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.36
Katherine Rist
usually #2 Singles 40%, also #1 Singles 40% · published
Andre Judice
published 4.5
4.25
Diana Granger
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
4.10
Laurie Lambert
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
Sarah Porter
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Stella Jones
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Megan Dorny + Amanda Pratzel7081% games+12.2% vs expected
Janine Petersen + Diana Granger19263% games+7.9% vs expected
Adrien Jenkins + Amanda Pratzel224 matchesnot enough data
Megan Dorny + Diana Granger303 matchesnot enough data
Amanda Pratzel + Angela Jewell303 matchesnot enough data
Meagan Seay + Katherine Rist123 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.

5
Amanda Pratzel
62W–6L career · 7 lines in 2026
no projection at this level
5.00
Megan Dorny
40W–2L career · 5 lines in 2026
no projection at this level
4.93
5
Adrien Jenkins
12W–8L career · 6 lines in 2026
no projection at this level
4.79
5
Angela Jewell
17W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
no projection at this level
4.73
Lindsay Swenson
25W–6L career · 5 lines in 2026
no projection at this level
4.63
Meagan Seay
16W–13L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
4.60
4.5
Janine Petersen
77W–34L career · type A · 8 lines in 2026
<1%56%43%
4.48
Katherine Rist
20W–13L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%84%16%
4.36
4.5
Andre Judice
1W–1L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
4.5
Diana Granger
64W–41L career · 7 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
4.25
Laurie Lambert
19W–17L career · 6 lines in 2026
23%76%<1%
4.10
Sarah Porter
7W–3L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Stella Jones
19W–23L career · 1 line in 2026
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.