Teams

Sunpro-Harlan

2024 USTA Adult 55 & Over · 8.0W

17 players · average NTRP 3.95 / 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
2024-06-17vs Sports Mall-Affleck/JonesLost 01
L#3 DoublesKatrina Harlan / DeeAnn Edwards vs Michelle Moscon / Natalie Watts6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2024-06-10vs Salt Lake Tennis-RollinsWon 10
W#3 DoublesDebi Johnson / Teri Bishop vs Bleecker Springs / Carlene Kemp6-4, 7-5
2024-06-03vs Salt Lake Tennis-RollinsWon 20
W#2 DoublesTena Maughan / Brenda Fowler vs Christina Baer / Marsha Elmore4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesTeri Bishop / Linda Fillmore vs Karen Nickolaisen / Christine Lee6-3, 6-3
2024-05-20vs Eccles Tennis Center-SmithWon 10
W#2 DoublesBecky Raymond / Kelle Jones vs Kathy Miller-Rees / Andrea Kehl6-3, 6-4
2024-05-13vs Sports Mall-AndersonLost 02
L#1 DoublesDeeAnn Edwards / Nan Black vs Crystal Spackman / Kriss Young1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesLinda Fillmore / Teri Bishop vs Linda Marz / April Blessing7-5, 3-6, 1-0
2024-05-07vs Sports Mall-Affleck/JonesLost 01
L#3 DoublesLinda Fillmore / Debi Johnson vs Sandy Adamson / Janice Stokes-Burns3-6, 6-1, 0-1
2024-04-29Split 11
L#1 DoublesKelle Jones / Becky Raymond vs Sue Curtis / AnnMarie Chadwick1-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesBrenda Fowler / Tena Maughan vs Janee Roper / Lori Taylor6-4, 6-4
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 standings5 teams · 8.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Sunpro-Harlan62141024225
2Sports Mall-Anderson44121229245
3Sports Mall-Affleck/Jones35101433251
4Salt Lake Tennis-Rollins3581636249
5Ivory Ridge-Hyde1791532241

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 3.55 estimated across 16 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.

4.11
Jane McQuade
usually #3 Doubles 42%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.97
Ann Phillips
usually #3 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
3.83
Becky Raymond
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.75
Linda Fillmore
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.67
Teri Bishop
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.60
Tena Maughan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.57
Suzanne Burdge
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published
3.57
Debi Johnson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.57
Shannon Shepherd
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
3.54
Brenda Fowler
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.44
DeeAnn Edwards
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.41
Nan Black
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.37
Katrina Harlan
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.20
Cheryl Harker
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.18
Kelly Mortensen
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
3.04
TRACY PADGETT
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
Kelle Jones
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Linda Fillmore + Cheryl Harker4266% games+5.1% vs expected
Debi Johnson + Teri Bishop6156% games+4.3% vs expected
DeeAnn Edwards + Katrina Harlan71442% games+2.6% vs expected
Kelle Jones + Becky Raymond192053% games+2.6% vs expected
Jane McQuade + Ann Phillips584453% games−0.4% vs expected
DeeAnn Edwards + Nan Black416646% games−1.1% vs expected
DeeAnn Edwards + Cheryl Harker7653% games−1.9% vs expected
Kelly Mortensen + Katrina Harlan151449% games−2.7% vs expected
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.

4.5
Jane McQuade
267W–181L career · 12 lines in 2024
20%80%<1%
4.11
4.5
Ann Phillips
78W–63L career · 7 lines in 2024
60%40%<1%
3.97
4
Becky Raymond
81W–68L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%89%10%
3.83
Linda Fillmore
101W–63L career · 3 lines in 2024
3%95%2%
3.75
4
Teri Bishop
181W–151L career · 6 lines in 2024
10%89%<1%
3.67
4
Tena Maughan
87W–84L career · 2 lines in 2024
23%77%<1%
3.60
Suzanne Burdge
89W–81L career · 7 lines in 2024
29%71%<1%
3.57
4
Debi Johnson
143W–73L career · 2 lines in 2024
29%71%<1%
3.57
Shannon Shepherd
89W–80L career · 7 lines in 2024
30%70%<1%
3.57
4
Brenda Fowler
87W–76L career · 2 lines in 2024
37%63%<1%
3.54
4
DeeAnn Edwards
117W–144L career · 2 lines in 2024
67%33%<1%
3.44
Nan Black
48W–77L career · 1 line in 2024
75%25%<1%
3.41
3.5
Katrina Harlan
128W–128L career · 7 lines in 2024
<1%85%15%
3.37
3.5
Cheryl Harker
164W–136L career · 6 lines in 2024
7%92%1%
3.20
Kelly Mortensen
110W–99L career · 7 lines in 2024
8%91%1%
3.18
3.5
TRACY PADGETT
105W–91L career · 5 lines in 2024
37%63%<1%
3.04
Kelle Jones
56W–96L career · 2 lines in 2024
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.