Teams

KY/LEX/Ni

2025 USTA SPRING FUN LEAGUE 18 & Over · Women 3.5

16 players · average NTRP 3.20 / KENTUCKY

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
2025-05-27vs KY/Lex/OverstreetLost 12
L#1 DoublesAllyssa Kilanowski / Emily Pernice vs Erin Stoffer / Carlyn Moore2-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesPriscila Manoel vs Lee Walker6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAmy Johns / Lee Ann Sheehy vs Rhonda Hilton / Monica King6-2, 7-5
2025-05-23vs KY/Lex/OverstreetSplit 11
L#1 SinglesPriscila Manoel vs Elizabeth Bell4-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDavis Dickens / Leah Lykins vs Monica King / April Russell6-1, 6-2
2025-05-16vs KY/Lex/OverstreetWon 21
W#1 DoublesDavis Dickens / Patty Ni vs Allison Overstreet / Marvetta Overstreet6-1, 6-4
W#1 SinglesSophie Schmidt vs Patti Stanton6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesMadison Liford / Kristi Martin vs Taylor Wilcox / Ann Albrecht5-7, 3-6
2025-04-27vs KY/Lex/OverstreetWon 21
W#1 DoublesRuth Anna Swacker / Lucy Butt vs Allison Overstreet / Carlyn Moore6-2, 6-2
W#1 SinglesJordan Kiviniemi-Moore vs April Russell7-5, 6-2
L#2 DoublesDavis Dickens / Leah Lykins vs Marvetta Overstreet / Brooke Marnitz5-7, 3-6
2025-04-11vs KY/Lex/OverstreetWon 21
W#1 DoublesAllyssa Kilanowski / Kristi Martin vs Allison Overstreet / Marvetta Overstreet6-3, 6-2
W#1 SinglesPriscila Manoel vs Lee Walker6-1, 1-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAmy Johns / Lee Ann Sheehy vs Rhonda Hilton / April Russell4-6, 1-6
2025-03-27vs KY/Lex/OverstreetWon 21
W#1 DoublesMadison Liford / Ruth Anna Swacker vs Rachael Carroll / Elizabeth Bell6-2, 6-4
W#1 SinglesSophie Schmidt vs Taylor Wilcox6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesMeredith Ginn Lam / Emily Pernice vs Carlyn Moore / Erin Stoffer2-6, 3-6
2025-03-19vs KY/Lex/OverstreetWon 20
W#1 SinglesPriscila Manoel vs Elizabeth Bell6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesMeredith Ginn Lam / Madison Liford vs Allison Overstreet / Lee Walker7-5, 7-6
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 Women 3.5 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 3.05 estimated across 15 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.

3.50
Ruth Anna Swacker
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.46
Lucy Butt
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.34
Emily Pernice
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.33
Sophie Schmidt
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.30
Allyssa Kilanowski
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.27
Davis Dickens
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.19
Priscila Manoel
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.97
Madison Liford
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.84
Jordan Kiviniemi-Moore
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.83
Kristi Martin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.80
Dana Gerken
published 3
2.79
Patty Ni
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.76
Leah Lykins
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.75
Lee Ann Sheehy
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.67
Amy Johns
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Meredith Ginn Lam
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.

Davis Dickens + Patty Ni4257% games+13.4% vs expected
Lucy Butt + Ruth Anna Swacker12267% games+11.8% vs expected
Madison Liford + Ruth Anna Swacker6068% games+5.5% vs expected
Kristi Martin + Leah Lykins2348% games+4.3% vs expected
Amy Johns + Lee Ann Sheehy2743% games−6.0% vs expected
Madison Liford + Amy Johns404 matchesnot enough data
Madison Liford + Dana Gerken314 matchesnot enough data
Leah Lykins + Dana Gerken404 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.

Ruth Anna Swacker
24W–3L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%49%51%
3.50
Lucy Butt
23W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%61%39%
3.46
Emily Pernice
29W–28L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%86%13%
3.34
Sophie Schmidt
24W–18L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Allyssa Kilanowski
13W–34L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%91%8%
3.30
3.5
Davis Dickens
17W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
3%92%5%
3.27
Priscila Manoel
9W–14L career · 4 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.19
Madison Liford
20W–12L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%58%42%
2.97
Jordan Kiviniemi-Moore
8W–14L career · 1 line in 2025
1%87%13%
2.84
Kristi Martin
33W–24L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%88%12%
2.83
3
Dana Gerken
18W–17L career · no lines in 2025
2%91%8%
2.80
3
Patty Ni
23W–27L career · 1 line in 2025
2%91%7%
2.79
Leah Lykins
36W–38L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%92%4%
2.76
Lee Ann Sheehy
17W–37L career · 2 lines in 2025
4%93%4%
2.75
3
Amy Johns
26W–28L career · 2 lines in 2025
11%88%1%
2.67
Meredith Ginn Lam
14W–15L career · 2 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.