Teams

Liberty Park-Swalberg

2025 Adult 65 & Over · 6.0W

12 players · average NTRP 3.10 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2025-09-19vs Utah/McDougal/65&Over6.0WLost 01
L#2 DoublesMary Jane Swalberg / Mari Bickmore vs Becky Nelson / Gayle Waldron2-6, 3-6
2025-09-12vs Park City MARC-Kintner/PerryWon 20
W#2 DoublesLili Leiataua Iosefa / Emma Li vs Eileen Kintner / Nancy Stone6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesPaula Naatz / LaRae Dean vs Judith Turner / Sue Abrams6-2, 6-2
2025-09-05vs Utah/McDougal/65&Over6.0WSplit 11
L#2 DoublesMary Jane Swalberg / Melanie Decker vs Christina Marshall / Summer Borla1-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesEmma Li / Lili Leiataua Iosefa vs Sue Ellen Vincent / Patti Miner1-6, 7-5, 1-0
2025-08-25vs Park City MARC-Kintner/PerrySplit 11
W#2 DoublesLili Leiataua Iosefa / Melanie Decker vs Nancy Holloway / Susan Durbin6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesPaula Naatz / Emma Li vs Cynthia Perry / Mary Ann Koson2-6, 0-6
2025-08-18vs Utah/McDougal/65&Over6.0WLost 02
L#2 DoublesLili Leiataua Iosefa / LaRae Dean vs Christine Adams / Jill McEwen3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesRose Barlow / KayeLynn BASTIAN vs Marilyn Patch / Summer Borla1-6, 6-1, 0-1
2025-08-14vs Park City MARC-Kintner/PerryLost 01
L#2 DoublesPaula Naatz / Lili Leiataua Iosefa vs Mary Ann Koson / Cynthia Perry1-6, 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 standings3 teams · 6.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Utah/McDougal/65&Over6.0W511449101
2Park City MARC-Kintner/Perry2471124171
3Liberty Park-Swalberg2461225173

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 2.57 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.

3.09
Karen Baskin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.65
KayeLynn BASTIAN
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.63
Elaine Day
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.48
Mary Jane Swalberg
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.42
Melanie Decker
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.37
Emma Li
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.31
Mari Bickmore
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
LaRae Dean
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Lili Leiataua Iosefa
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Nancy Miller
published
Paula Naatz
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Rose Barlow
usually #3 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.

Mary Jane Swalberg + Emma Li2835% games+0.4% vs expected
LaRae Dean + Nancy Miller0932% games−6.6% vs expected
Mari Bickmore + Karen Baskin2443% games−13.9% vs expected
Mary Jane Swalberg + Melanie Decker088% games−21.5% vs expected
Lili Leiataua Iosefa + Emma Li2640% gamesnot enough data
Elaine Day + KayeLynn BASTIAN044 matchesnot enough data
Elaine Day + Melanie Decker123 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.

3.5
Karen Baskin
18W–45L career · type A · 3 lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.09
3
KayeLynn BASTIAN
209W–244L career · 2 lines in 2025
14%85%1%
2.65
3
Elaine Day
123W–244L career · 5 lines in 2025
17%83%<1%
2.63
Mary Jane Swalberg
76W–205L career · 2 lines in 2025
57%43%<1%
2.48
3
Melanie Decker
49W–170L career · 5 lines in 2025
71%29%<1%
2.42
Emma Li
53W–142L career · 3 lines in 2025
82%18%<1%
2.37
3
Mari Bickmore
87W–239L career · type A · 4 lines in 2025
91%9%<1%
2.31
LaRae Dean
42W–66L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Lili Leiataua Iosefa
36W–45L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Nancy Miller
38W–105L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Paula Naatz
57W–82L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Rose Barlow
0W–7L career · 1 line 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.