Teams

Salt, Lime and Tennis Time!

2026 Tri Level · Tri Level Women 3.5

9 players · average NTRP 3.81 / MONTANA

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 →
Flight standings2 teams · Tri Level Women 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Salt, Lime and Tennis Time!000000
2Tri-hards000000

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 3.66 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.

4.16
Mariah Mandt
published
4.10
Joanne Sposito
published 4.5
4.05
Jennifer Poetzl
published 4
3.99
Elizabeth Lund
published 4
Colleen Green
published 4
3.43
Mary Wagner
published 3.5
3.27
Tina Ovnic
published 3.5
3.19
Julia Haggerty
published 3.5
3.08
Suzanne Taylor
published 3.5
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.

Suzanne Taylor + Julia Haggerty7753% games+4.7% vs expected
Tina Ovnic + Mary Wagner6849% games−1.9% vs expected
Suzanne Taylor + Tina Ovnic12751% games−2.2% vs expected
Joanne Sposito + Elizabeth Lund044 matchesnot enough data
Suzanne Taylor + Mary Wagner123 matchesnot enough data
Tina Ovnic + Julia Haggerty033 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.

Mariah Mandt
4W–5L career · no lines in 2026
13%86%1%
4.16
4.5
Joanne Sposito
63W–73L career · no lines in 2026
24%76%<1%
4.10
4
Jennifer Poetzl
33W–21L career · type S · no lines in 2026
<1%35%65%
4.05
4
Elizabeth Lund
76W–48L career · no lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
3.99
4
Colleen Green
33W–11L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
3.5
Mary Wagner
12W–15L career · no lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
3.43
3.5
Tina Ovnic
34W–37L career · no lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
3.5
Julia Haggerty
15W–31L career · no lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.19
3.5
Suzanne Taylor
43W–46L career · no lines in 2026
28%72%<1%
3.08

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.