Teams

Rice/PH

2022 TUL TRI-LEVEL 18 & Over League · WOMEN 2.5

11 players · average NTRP 3.00 / OKLAHOMA

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
2022-08-22vs Watson/LFWon 21
L#1 DoublesChelsea Richardson / Jessica Mardis vs Jillian Vivion / Casey McKenzie0-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesJessica Rice / Sarah Davis vs Haley Ragsdale / Allison Ashman6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesAmy Bradt / Barbara Ford vs Maghin Abernathy / Crystal Wing6-0, 6-4
2022-08-18vs Park/ISLost 02
L#1 DoublesSarah Davis / Jessica Mardis vs Linda Peterson / Paula Torrence5-7, 5-7
L#3 DoublesKristina Denney / Amy Bradt vs Nancy Park / Debbie Crowley4-6, 6-2, 0-1
2022-08-10vs Falcon/LFWon 21
W#1 DoublesChristina Richey / Barbara Ford vs Blanca Falcon / Margaret Kyle6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesSarah Davis / Tiffany McCrackin vs Rosa Dillingham / Joan Gausvik6-1, 6-3
L#3 DoublesChelsea Richardson / Stephanie Loseke vs Divina Roman / Elaine Hammar2-6, 1-6
2022-08-02vs Elmore/LFWon 21
W#1 DoublesJessica Mardis / Sarah Davis vs Traci Hazel / Corinne Johnson4-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAmy Bradt / Christina Richey vs Jamie Schaffitzel / Tracy Roberson4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKristina Denney / Barbara Ford vs Kristin Seifried / Michelle Spurling7-5, 6-4
2022-07-28vs Green 1: Cook/LFLost 03
L#1 DoublesStephanie Loseke / Chelsea Richardson vs Kimberly KnifeChief / Laurie Eccles7-6, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJessica Rice / Jessica Mardis vs Lisa Faith / Michelle Bryan4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesKristina Denney / Amy Bradt vs Haven Willis / Taylor Toliver2-6, 2-6
2022-07-13vs Colleen Sanders/LFLost 12
L#1 DoublesStephanie Loseke / Jessica Rice vs Valerie Santiago / Alexis Hubble2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesTiffany McCrackin / Christina Richey vs Yoko Elizondo / Colleen Sanders5-7, 3-6
W#3 DoublesKristina Denney / Barbara Ford vs Susamma Rajan / Vivian Rogers6-2, 6-2
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 standings18 teams · WOMEN 2.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Green 1: Cook/LF6014410117
2Blue 1: Spencer/LF6013513148
3Colleen Sanders/LF5113510111
4Red 1: Stuart/LF5114416144
5Kimbrough/IS4211715158
6Kim Lauer/PH4211717145
7Utley/LF4212618162
8Westfall/LF4210820160
9Schroedter/TTC339922169
10Falcon/LF339923167
11Kramer/LF3371123173
12Rice/PH3371123171
13Watson/LF249919148
14Park/IS1551327195
15Price/LF1551329199
16Removed players000000
17Foust/LF0651327177
18Hendrix/LF0621633195

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 2.82 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.

3.13
Stephanie Loseke
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.04
Lisa Mitchell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.98
Jessica Mardis
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.89
Amy Bradt
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Chelsea Richardson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.70
Christina Richey
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.62
Tiffany McCrackin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.58
Kristina Denney
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.57
Barbara Ford
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
Jessica Rice
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Sarah Davis
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.

Christina Richey + Amy Bradt1438% games+5.7% vs expected
Kristina Denney + Barbara Ford3551% games+5.2% vs expected
Amy Bradt + Tiffany McCrackin2447% games+4.6% vs expected
Kristina Denney + Amy Bradt2740% games−2.2% vs expected
Christina Richey + Tiffany McCrackin3343% games−4.2% vs expected
Kristina Denney + Tiffany McCrackin4254% gamesnot enough data
Tiffany McCrackin + Sarah Davis314 matchesnot enough data
Christina Richey + Sarah Davis213 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.

Stephanie Loseke
130W–91L career · 5 lines in 2022
17%83%<1%
3.13
Lisa Mitchell
89W–79L career · 1 line in 2022
36%64%<1%
3.04
Jessica Mardis
49W–30L career · 4 lines in 2022
55%45%<1%
2.98
3
Amy Bradt
107W–76L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%79%21%
2.89
3
Chelsea Richardson
58W–48L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Christina Richey
42W–41L career · 3 lines in 2022
6%93%1%
2.70
Tiffany McCrackin
53W–43L career · 2 lines in 2022
17%83%<1%
2.62
Kristina Denney
62W–86L career · 4 lines in 2022
26%74%<1%
2.58
3
Barbara Ford
37W–44L career · 4 lines in 2022
28%71%<1%
2.57
Jessica Rice
23W–12L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sarah Davis
32W–15L career · 4 lines in 2022
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.