Teams

Utah/Ellis/40&Over4.0W

2025 USTA Adult 40 & Over · 4.0W AM

22 players · average NTRP 4.00 / 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 →
Schedule3 played
2025-08-07Won 10
W#3 DoublesTiffany Renfro / AMANDA NEFF vs Lisa Beames / Alison Pearce7-5, 6-7, 1-0
2025-06-26vs Liberty Park-Swensen/SampsonLost 01
L#2 DoublesPamela Roberts / Joanna Heiden vs Deanne Goaslind / Mindy Dunyon4-6, 7-6, 0-1
2025-06-12vs Ivory Ridge-Murdock/ChristoffersonSplit 11
L#1 DoublesPamela Roberts / Kristi Roggensack vs Emily Jarvie / Nicole Holland3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesAMANDA NEFF / Amber Thompson vs Tammy Petersen / Christine Neeleman6-4, 7-5
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 standings4 teams · 4.0W AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Utah/Ellis/40&Over4.0W8023923231
2Wasatch High-Peterson/King62201231270
321 Athletics-Mower/Glines35131944320
4SunPro-Christensen/Handley0832959372

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 3.67 estimated across 18 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.

4.15
Amber Jorgensen
usually #1 Singles 70%, also #1 Doubles 30% · published 4.5
3.95
Julie Cooley
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
3.92
Alyson Ellis
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.90
Catherine Bliss
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published 4
3.86
Kristi Roggensack
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.83
Tiffany Kasteler
usually #1 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 42% · published
3.80
Teisa Linscott
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.79
Susan Koelliker
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
AMANDA NEFF
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
Anji DowDell
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.71
Katy Alder
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.69
Gretchen Soffe
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.65
Amber Thompson
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.60
Joanna Heiden
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.58
Annalyn Adams
usually #2 Doubles 55%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published 4
3.56
Pamela Roberts
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.40
Kelly Wilcox
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 23% · published
3.25
Julie Labrum
usually #3 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.20
Kristy Olsen
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.15
Tiffany Renfro
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
Katie Zimmerman
published
Traci Church
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 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.

Tiffany Kasteler + Annalyn Adams5069% games+19.1% vs expected
Kelly Wilcox + Kristy Olsen11165% games+16.8% vs expected
AMANDA NEFF + Pamela Roberts5167% games+10.5% vs expected
Joanna Heiden + Anji DowDell5458% games+8.1% vs expected
Tiffany Kasteler + Susan Koelliker321059% games+7.2% vs expected
Tiffany Renfro + Alyson Ellis10458% games+7.0% vs expected
Anji DowDell + Alyson Ellis8363% games+5.1% vs expected
Julie Labrum + Kelly Wilcox4453% games+5.1% 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
Amber Jorgensen
34W–15L career · 10 lines in 2025
14%85%1%
4.15
Julie Cooley
61W–23L career · 6 lines in 2025
64%36%<1%
3.95
4
Alyson Ellis
179W–48L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%71%29%
3.92
4
Catherine Bliss
239W–169L career · 9 lines in 2025
<1%76%24%
3.90
4
Kristi Roggensack
126W–91L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%83%16%
3.86
Tiffany Kasteler
167W–101L career · 12 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.83
4
Teisa Linscott
170W–105L career · 8 lines in 2025
2%91%8%
3.80
4
Susan Koelliker
133W–81L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
3.79
4
AMANDA NEFF
54W–44L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Anji DowDell
99W–77L career · 6 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Katy Alder
81W–81L career · 4 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.71
4
Gretchen Soffe
79W–60L career · 4 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.69
4
Amber Thompson
128W–106L career · 7 lines in 2025
15%84%1%
3.65
4
Joanna Heiden
93W–99L career · 5 lines in 2025
24%76%<1%
3.60
4
Annalyn Adams
122W–97L career · 11 lines in 2025
27%73%<1%
3.58
Pamela Roberts
99W–46L career · 2 lines in 2025
34%66%<1%
3.56
Kelly Wilcox
140W–69L career · 13 lines in 2025
<1%76%24%
3.40
Julie Labrum
102W–99L career · 9 lines in 2025
4%93%3%
3.25
Kristy Olsen
72W–64L career · 7 lines in 2025
8%91%2%
3.20
3.5
Tiffany Renfro
119W–133L career · 8 lines in 2025
15%85%1%
3.15
Katie Zimmerman
27W–30L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Traci Church
39W–54L 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.