Teams

Park City MARC-Greenhalgh/Brooks

2026 USTA Adult 40 & Over · 4.0W AM

19 players · average NTRP 3.89 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
2026-08-06Won 10
W#2 DoublesTammie Pearson / Chieko Perry vs Debby Richards / Jennifer Jensen6-0, 6-3
2026-07-30vs SunPro-Blackhurst/MayberryLost 01
L#2 DoublesTammie Pearson / Megan Rusconi vs Shelli Johnston / Kimberly Mayfield2-6, 6-7
2026-07-23Lost 01
L#2 DoublesTammie Pearson / Chieko Perry vs Teri Bishop / Melissa Despain1-6, 1-0
2026-07-16vs SunPro-Fowkes/CarterLost 02
L#1 DoublesSunshine Torczon / Holly Balcer vs Megan Warren / Sue Smith6-7, 4-6
L#3 DoublesRenae Brooks / Megan Rusconi vs Jennifer Napierski / Melissa Pickard3-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-07-09Lost 02
L#2 DoublesChieko Perry / Sunshine Torczon vs Katie Swensen / Emily Benton2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesHolly Balcer / AMy Huish vs Kristen Okland / Jennifer Wecker6-7, 4-6
2026-07-02Lost 01
L#2 DoublesSherree Greenhalgh / Sunshine Torczon vs Amy Johnson / Jessica Olsen4-6, 5-7
2026-06-25Lost 01
L#3 DoublesRenae Brooks / Megan Rusconi vs Brenda Fowler / Halli Craft6-2, 4-6, 0-1
2026-06-18Lost 01
L#1 SinglesTammie Pearson vs Cricket Rollins4-6, 4-6
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 4.0W AM 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 3.61 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.

4.06
Sandee Kozel
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.92
Kristin Killian
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.88
Faith Petersen
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.80
Danielle Raymond
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.71
Holly Balcer
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.66
Tammie Pearson
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 4
3.66
Susel Weight
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.64
Charlotte Trahan
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.63
Sunshine Torczon
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.60
Laura Nunnelly
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 40% · published 4
3.58
Chieko Perry
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.56
AMy Huish
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.56
Kristina Dell'Orco
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #1 Singles 22% · published 3.5
3.48
Leslie Goldman Tepper
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.44
Renae Brooks
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.36
Sherree Greenhalgh
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.33
Brynn Hardman
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.20
Megan Rusconi
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Kristin Baker
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.

Charlotte Trahan + Susel Weight161057% games+5.7% vs expected
AMy Huish + Kristin Killian201259% games+2.7% vs expected
Megan Rusconi + Renae Brooks191847% games+2.6% vs expected
AMy Huish + Susel Weight9055% games+2.2% vs expected
Sherree Greenhalgh + Renae Brooks345245% games−1.6% vs expected
Sherree Greenhalgh + Megan Rusconi2445% games−5.5% vs expected
Charlotte Trahan + Kristin Killian5077% gamesnot enough data
Megan Rusconi + Susel Weight224 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.

4
Sandee Kozel
82W–27L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
4.06
4
Kristin Killian
105W–49L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
3.92
4
Faith Petersen
101W–83L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.88
3.5
Danielle Raymond
45W–12L career · 12 lines in 2026
<1%1%99%
3.80
4
Holly Balcer
16W–19L career · 2 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
3.71
4
Tammie Pearson
53W–45L career · 4 lines in 2026
10%89%<1%
3.66
4
Susel Weight
100W–72L career · 8 lines in 2026
11%89%<1%
3.66
4
Charlotte Trahan
122W–63L career · type A · 6 lines in 2026
15%85%<1%
3.64
4
Sunshine Torczon
54W–60L career · 3 lines in 2026
15%84%<1%
3.63
4
Laura Nunnelly
47W–43L career · 5 lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.60
4
Chieko Perry
80W–103L career · 6 lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
3.58
4
AMy Huish
83W–62L career · 5 lines in 2026
31%69%<1%
3.56
3.5
Kristina Dell'Orco
73W–17L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
3.56
4
Leslie Goldman Tepper
14W–18L career · type A · 3 lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
3.48
4
Renae Brooks
96W–131L career · 2 lines in 2026
68%32%<1%
3.44
4
Sherree Greenhalgh
90W–159L career · 5 lines in 2026
86%14%<1%
3.36
3.5
Brynn Hardman
45W–34L career · 9 lines in 2026
1%90%10%
3.33
3.5
Megan Rusconi
73W–128L career · 3 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
3.20
Kristin Baker
9W–10L career · no lines in 2026
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.