Teams

Liberty Park-Swalberg/Harman

2025 USTA Adult 40 & Over · 3.0W AM

13 players · average NTRP 3.12 / 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
2025-07-30Won 10
W#2 DoublesJill McEwen / Linda Larsen vs Carrie Jensen / Marilyn Patch6-2, 4-6, 1-0
2025-07-23vs Salt Lake Tennis-Bayna/BickmoreWon 30
W#1 DoublesJill McEwen / KayeLynn BASTIAN vs Maureen Russo / Diana Vogel6-0, 5-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesCaryl Fletcher vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesRebecca Harman / Heidi Robinson vs Andy Andersen / Jocelyn Pearson6-4, 5-7, 1-0
2025-07-16vs Red Ledges-SmithLost 01
L#2 DoublesHeidi Robinson / Jill McEwen vs Kelly Acevedo / Juli Taylor4-6, 7-6, 0-1
2025-07-09vs Sports Mall-GeorgeWon 20
W#1 DoublesCaryl Fletcher / KayeLynn BASTIAN vs Heather Callister / Sarah Gardner6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesLinda Larsen / Jill McEwen vs Jill Raemisch / Holly Goulding7-6, 6-2
2025-07-02vs Park City MARC-Llewellyn/SahlmanWon 21
L#1 DoublesLinda Larsen / Jill McEwen vs Bridget Llewellyn / Margaret Bloomer2-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesMaria Pettit / Caryl Fletcher vs Rachel Sahlman / Kelley Schorn6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesWendy Conrad / Heidi Robinson vs Beth Kidd / Karin Fojtik6-4, 6-1
2025-06-25vs Sunpro Madsen/Wills-MitchellLost 03
L#1 DoublesLinda Larsen / Jill McEwen vs Carrie Jensen / Suzette Greer5-7, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesRebecca Harman / Paige Holland vs Shirley Johnson / Christina Marshall2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesElaine Day / Caryl Fletcher vs Beatriz Velazquez / Marilyn Patch5-7, 3-6
2025-06-18vs Salt Lake Tennis-Bayna/BickmoreWon 20
W#2 DoublesRebecca Harman / Heidi Robinson vs Kristin Midyett / Stacy Dyer6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMary Jane Swalberg / Jill McEwen vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2025-06-11vs Red Ledges-SmithWon 20
W#1 DoublesMaria Pettit / Caryl Fletcher vs Shana Wood / Giuliana Willis6-0, 6-3
W#3 DoublesRebecca Harman / Paige Holland vs Britta Davis / Lindsay Egan6-2, 6-3
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 standings5 teams · 3.0W AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Utah/Krueger/40&Over3.0W7128412155
2Liberty Park-Swalberg/Harman7124820211
3Sports Mall-Stroud-Peterson/Sweat62211124208
4Wasatch High-Ritchie/Heywood62201225210
5SunPro-Cardall/Oliveros35131940279

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 2.84 estimated across 11 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.

3.25
Mary HENSLEY
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.22
Angelyn Sorenson
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.03
Jill McEwen
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
2.92
Wendy Conrad
usually #3 Doubles 42%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3
2.90
Maria Pettit
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.89
Rebecca Harman
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published
2.66
Caryl Fletcher
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.65
KayeLynn BASTIAN
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.64
Elaine Day
usually #3 Doubles 36%, also #2 Doubles 36% · published 3
2.59
Heidi Robinson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.48
Mary Jane Swalberg
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Linda Larsen
published
Paige Holland
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 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.

Mary HENSLEY + Angelyn Sorenson321757% games+9.2% vs expected
Rebecca Harman + Heidi Robinson9458% games+7.1% vs expected
KayeLynn BASTIAN + Maria Pettit5649% games+4.6% vs expected
Mary Jane Swalberg + Maria Pettit81144% games+2.1% vs expected
Caryl Fletcher + Maria Pettit18854% games−0.5% vs expected
KayeLynn BASTIAN + Angelyn Sorenson5548% games−1.5% vs expected
Rebecca Harman + Maria Pettit61145% games−2.6% vs expected
Caryl Fletcher + KayeLynn BASTIAN8847% games−2.8% 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.

Mary HENSLEY
60W–62L career · 6 lines in 2025
2%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Angelyn Sorenson
71W–52L career · type A · 7 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.22
3.5
Jill McEwen
43W–55L career · 7 lines in 2025
41%59%<1%
3.03
3
Wendy Conrad
98W–94L career · 12 lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
2.92
3
Maria Pettit
188W–196L career · 10 lines in 2025
<1%78%22%
2.90
Rebecca Harman
241W–300L career · 18 lines in 2025
<1%80%19%
2.89
3
Caryl Fletcher
142W–122L career · 5 lines in 2025
11%88%<1%
2.66
3
KayeLynn BASTIAN
209W–244L career · 9 lines in 2025
13%87%<1%
2.65
3
Elaine Day
124W–248L career · 11 lines in 2025
14%85%<1%
2.64
3
Heidi Robinson
14W–12L career · 4 lines in 2025
24%76%<1%
2.59
Mary Jane Swalberg
75W–203L career · 4 lines in 2025
56%44%<1%
2.48
Linda Larsen
18W–32L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Paige Holland
1W–1L 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.