Teams

High Point/Escutia W3.5

2025 DALLAS TENNIS 18 & Over ADULT S · S W. Thursday League

18 players · average NTRP 3.33 / TEXAS

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
2025-06-26vs McKinney/Hedblom W3.5Split 11
L#2 DoublesPhyllis McGahey / Melissa Monroe vs Danette Goodyear / Judy Steglich2-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJeannette Escutia / Jeanette Johnson vs Annette Hedblom / Paula Marbach7-5, 2-6, 1-0
2025-06-19vs Oak Creek/Kaplan-Grubstein W3.5Lost 01
L#1 DoublesPhyllis McGahey / Kandis Thompson vs Nancy McGuire / Cynthia Solomon6-6
2025-06-18vs El Dorado/Miller W3.5Lost 02
L#1 DoublesOmara Al-Hafi / Jeanette Johnson vs Melissa Berg / Amy MacNicol7-5, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMelissa Monroe / Eve Liu vs Amanda Jackson / Erma Bryant4-6, 4-6
W#1 DoublesKandis Thompson / Phyllis McGahey vs Libby Johnson / Stephanie Hilliard3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#1 SinglesEve Liu vs Arlene Kirkland6-4, 2-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesPaige Bower / Lisa Swirczynski vs Megan Leftwich / Kathy Fagan1-6, 5-7
2025-05-15Lost 03
L#1 DoublesPaige Bower / Jeanette Johnson vs Kate Walters / Alexandra Klitsch4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesJeannette Escutia / Phyllis McGahey vs Whitney Huffman / Lindsey Diaz1-6, 6-7
L#2 SinglesEve Liu vs Mandy Stewart2-6, 0-6
2025-05-08vs Stonebridge/Giacchino-Cantu W3.5Won 10
W#2 DoublesOmara Al-Hafi / Alma Gomez vs Beth Cromwell / Robin Bates6-2, 6-3
2025-05-02vs Greenhill/Lipshy-Oujezdsky W3.5Lost 02
L#1 DoublesAlma Gomez / Phyllis McGahey vs Allison Singleton / Brenda Reynolds3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesOmara Al-Hafi / Eve Liu vs Jana Reist / Kim Holford4-6, 1-6
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 S W. Thursday League 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 3.14 estimated across 17 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.

3.45
Kandis Thompson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.38
Nancy Horan
usually #1 Singles 38%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
3.34
Judi Robeson
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published
3.29
Jadey Liu
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.25
Omara Al-Hafi
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.22
Laura Schussler
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.20
Gisella Kaendler
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
3.19
Cindy Chiou
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.14
Phyllis McGahey
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.13
Paige Bower
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.06
Alma Gomez
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #2 Singles 20% · published 3.5
3.03
Annette Delbridge
usually #1 Singles 86%, also #2 Singles 14% · published 3
3.03
Melissa Monroe
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.99
Jeannette Escutia
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.90
Eve Liu
usually #3 Doubles 25%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.90
Lisa Swirczynski
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.89
Michelle Sowards
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Singles 17% · published
Jeanette Johnson
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.

Paige Bower + Laura Schussler3343% games−6.1% vs expected
Melissa Monroe + Michelle Sowards1434% games−10.3% vs expected
Phyllis McGahey + Jeannette Escutia1437% gamesnot enough data
Judi Robeson + Jadey Liu404 matchesnot enough data
Alma Gomez + Phyllis McGahey123 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.

Kandis Thompson
17W–18L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%64%36%
3.45
Nancy Horan
30W–16L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%80%19%
3.38
Judi Robeson
28W–27L career · 7 lines in 2025
1%86%13%
3.34
Jadey Liu
13W–15L career · 6 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
3.29
Omara Al-Hafi
6W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
4%93%4%
3.25
Laura Schussler
10W–11L career · 3 lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
Gisella Kaendler
16W–21L career · 4 lines in 2025
8%91%2%
3.20
3.5
Cindy Chiou
5W–11L career · 4 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.19
Phyllis McGahey
3W–11L career · 5 lines in 2025
16%84%1%
3.14
Paige Bower
6W–15L career · 2 lines in 2025
17%82%<1%
3.13
3.5
Alma Gomez
8W–24L career · 5 lines in 2025
34%66%<1%
3.06
3
Annette Delbridge
9W–37L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%41%59%
3.03
Melissa Monroe
7W–18L career · 6 lines in 2025
41%59%<1%
3.03
Jeannette Escutia
4W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
53%47%<1%
2.99
Eve Liu
2W–12L career · 4 lines in 2025
76%24%<1%
2.90
Lisa Swirczynski
4W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
76%24%<1%
2.90
Michelle Sowards
30W–31L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%78%22%
2.89
Jeanette Johnson
26W–42L 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.