Teams

IE-LLW-Kathy Cocker

2021 SCTA Tri-Level 18 & Over - IE · IE Women 4.0

11 players · average NTRP 3.71 / SO.CALIFORNIA

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 →
Schedule5 played
2021-11-14vs IE-SLCC-Michele WalterWon 20
W#2 DoublesKathalena Cocker / Julie Perkins vs Cesaria Vazquez / Michele Walter6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesStephanie Ells / Kelly Barhorst vs Kim Jensen / Catherine Leogrande6-1, 7-5
W#3 DoublesKelly Barhorst / Stephanie Ells vs Sheila Palmer / Jo Russo-Pereyra6-1, 6-2
2021-10-17vs IE-MTC-Jeanne ShelterWon 20
W#1 DoublesAllison Cocker / Amy Markham vs Diana Ortuno / Amanda Will7-6, 6-1
W#2 DoublesKathalena Cocker / Julie Perkins vs Joan Greene / Rebecca Cloyd6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesSusan Lacina / Kathalena Cocker vs Ilse Ungeheuer / Carmen Underwood6-1, 5-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesKelly Barhorst / Stephanie Ells vs Sheila Palmer / Heidi Brun6-1, 6-0
2021-10-03Won 10
W#1 DoublesAshley Knoblach / Allison Cocker vs Michelle Carter / Cristina Reed6-4, 6-1
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 IE Women 4.0 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 3.50 estimated across 9 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.

3.84
Cristina Hamlin
published 4
3.78
Julie Perkins
published
3.72
Amy Markham
published 4
3.70
Ashley Knoblach
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.63
Allison Cocker
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.31
Kathalena Cocker
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.30
Stephanie Ells
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.26
Sharon Hebert
published
2.94
Elizabeth Rydall
published 3
Beverly Haller
published
Shelley Mellentine
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.

Ashley Knoblach + Cristina Hamlin8357% games+7.3% vs expected
Kathalena Cocker + Allison Cocker5343% gamesnot enough data
Kathalena Cocker + Ashley Knoblach0634% gamesnot enough data
Kathalena Cocker + Sharon Hebert213 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
Cristina Hamlin
13W–10L career · no lines in 2021
<1%89%10%
3.84
Julie Perkins
9W–10L career · no lines in 2021
1%94%5%
3.78
4
Amy Markham
9W–8L career · no lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.72
4
Ashley Knoblach
83W–82L career · 1 line in 2021
6%93%1%
3.70
4
Allison Cocker
42W–28L career · 2 lines in 2021
15%85%<1%
3.63
3.5
Kathalena Cocker
136W–140L career · 3 lines in 2021
1%91%8%
3.31
3.5
Stephanie Ells
75W–51L career · 3 lines in 2021
1%93%6%
3.30
Sharon Hebert
9W–5L career · no lines in 2021
2%94%3%
3.26
3
Elizabeth Rydall
105W–82L career · no lines in 2021
<1%69%31%
2.94
Beverly Haller
1W–2L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Shelley Mellentine
1W–1L career · no lines in 2021
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.