Teams

Greenhill/Thornton-Hark W3.5

2025 DALLAS TENNIS 18 & Over ADULT S · S W. Thursday League

18 players · average NTRP 3.50 / TEXAS

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
2025-06-26Lost 02
L#1 DoublesStephanie Shah / Jannese Knaus vs Kerrie Stephanian / Dana Browne1-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesKeri Anderson vs Lindsey Starnes2-6, 4-6
2025-06-19Won 10
W#2 DoublesDiane Thornton / Jannese Knaus vs Holly Stroud / Missy Taylor4-2
2025-06-16vs DCC/Slaven W3.5Split 11
L#2 SinglesKeri Anderson vs Lindsey Meyer7-5, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesClaudine Vazquez / Linda Potts vs Sarah Klein / Laurie Aldredge6-0, 6-4
2025-06-05vs McKinney/Colston-Bowersox W3.5Won 30
W#1 DoublesStephanie Shah / Jannese Knaus vs Cathy Turner / Shera Cameron6-1, 6-1
W#1 SinglesTiffany Kendall vs Arlene Wiese6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesKeri Anderson vs Michelle Westbrook7-6, 5-7, 1-0
2025-05-29vs Stonebriar/Anderson-Buster W3.5Won 20
W#1 DoublesJannese Knaus / Diane Thornton vs Donna Bickerstaff / Kristi Barrientos7-5, 6-4
W#2 SinglesKeri Anderson vs Laura Storm6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesJackie Fogle / Lynn Johnson vs Tricia Ehrisman / Hilary Nagel0-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesKeri Anderson vs Katie Kilmer7-6, 6-4
W#3 DoublesLinda Potts / Claudine Vazquez vs Mary Tucker / Tanya Ford6-4, 6-4
2025-05-15vs Seay/Goelzer W3.5Won 20
W#1 SinglesKeri Anderson vs Leigh Anne Haugh6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJannese Knaus / Diane Thornton vs Lolly Landwehr / Katie Campbell6-4, 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 standings for S W. Thursday League 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 3.22 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.

3.61
Amanda Forrest
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.51
Stephanie Shah
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #1 Singles 21% · published
3.33
Suzannah Cronenwett
usually #1 Singles 56%, also #1 Doubles 22% · published
3.33
Keri Anderson
usually #2 Singles 83%, also #1 Singles 17% · published
3.30
Linda Potts
usually #2 Doubles 38%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published
3.26
Wincy Tomecko
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Jackie Fogle
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.23
Cathy Langland
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.20
Claudine Vazquez
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.20
Joy Sebold
usually #1 Doubles 42%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.16
Julie Bullard
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
3.10
Tiffany Kendall
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.08
Talia Pouratian
usually #2 Singles 40%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.08
Erin Baldwin
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
2.97
Lily Fish
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
2.90
Pamela Sewak
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Jannese Knaus
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Marianne Hark
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · 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.

Erin Baldwin + Amanda Forrest7359% games+5.0% vs expected
Stephanie Shah + Joy Sebold6645% games−2.8% vs expected
Wincy Tomecko + Talia Pouratian1539% gamesnot enough data
Julie Bullard + Amanda Forrest6061% gamesnot enough data
Stephanie Shah + Amanda Forrest314 matchesnot enough data
Cathy Langland + Julie Bullard134 matchesnot enough data
Pamela Sewak + Talia Pouratian134 matchesnot enough data
Julie Bullard + Suzannah Cronenwett224 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
Amanda Forrest
29W–11L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%21%79%
3.61
Stephanie Shah
49W–29L career · 13 lines in 2025
<1%47%53%
3.51
Suzannah Cronenwett
53W–16L career · 17 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.33
Keri Anderson
13W–9L career · 6 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.33
Linda Potts
19W–19L career · 8 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.30
Wincy Tomecko
11W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Jackie Fogle
4W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Cathy Langland
13W–29L career · 6 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.23
3.5
Claudine Vazquez
8W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.20
Joy Sebold
19W–32L career · 11 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.20
Julie Bullard
22W–20L career · 7 lines in 2025
10%89%<1%
3.16
Tiffany Kendall
9W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
21%78%<1%
3.10
Talia Pouratian
14W–18L career · 5 lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.08
3.5
Erin Baldwin
18W–10L career · 7 lines in 2025
27%73%<1%
3.08
Lily Fish
25W–9L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%58%42%
2.97
Pamela Sewak
10W–27L career · 10 lines in 2025
78%22%<1%
2.90
Jannese Knaus
12W–5L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Marianne Hark
14W–9L career · 3 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.