Teams

Liberty Park Tennis-Kemp

2022 USTA Adult 40 & Over · 4.5W AM

17 players · average NTRP 4.31 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2022-08-15Lost 01
L#1 DoublesEmily Bott / Emily Wallace vs Tracey Valentine / Stephanie Tonin5-7, 0-6
2022-08-08vs Ivory Ridge-HydeLost 01
L#1 SinglesJennifer Soulier vs Katy Myers4-6, 3-6
2022-08-01Won 10
W#2 DoublesMichelle Moscon / Emily Bott vs Natalie Lindquist / Amy Hansen6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-07-25vs Sunpro-AllenWon 10
W#1 SinglesJennifer Soulier vs Christy Davidson6-1, 6-1
2022-06-27vs Ivory Ridge-HydeLost 01
L#3 DoublesCarlene Kemp / Emily Bott vs Sue Curtis / Jennifer Burr2-6, 4-6
2022-06-20vs Sports Mall-Kasteler/BriggsLost 01
L#2 DoublesMichelle Moscon / Emily Bott vs Natalie Lindquist / Kristen Siddoway7-5, 2-6, 0-1
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 standings1 teams · 4.5W AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Liberty Park Tennis-Kemp17102249333

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 3.92 estimated across 13 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.

Allison Rideout
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.24
Emily Bott
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.21
Casey Pickett
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.12
Heidi Gordon
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4.5
4.09
Nanette Heath
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 4.5
4.00
Kandice Taylor
usually #1 Doubles 62%, also #2 Doubles 39% · published 4.5
3.96
Alisa Gardner
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published 4
3.92
Emily Wallace
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
3.84
Jennifer Soulier
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.82
Carlene Kemp
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
3.75
Michele Halls
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.73
Sara Pinsoneault
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.62
Holli Turner
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.61
Michelle Moscon
usually #2 Doubles 86%, also #1 Doubles 14% · published 4
Jackie Grant
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Janine Nesseth
published
Merri Gillespie
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · 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.

Emily Wallace + Nanette Heath351358% games+5.9% vs expected
Carlene Kemp + Emily Wallace3940% games+3.4% vs expected
Allison Rideout + Kandice Taylor6455% games+3.3% vs expected
Nanette Heath + Kandice Taylor9651% games+3.0% vs expected
Merri Gillespie + Kandice Taylor5253% games+1.3% vs expected
Michelle Moscon + Emily Bott171349% games−2.4% vs expected
Merri Gillespie + Holli Turner6945% games−3.6% vs expected
Michele Halls + Michelle Moscon7651% 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
Allison Rideout
23W–18L career · 6 lines in 2022
not enough data
4.5
Emily Bott
50W–44L career · 4 lines in 2022
3%95%2%
4.24
4.5
Casey Pickett
184W–134L career · 9 lines in 2022
6%93%1%
4.21
4.5
Heidi Gordon
105W–100L career · 3 lines in 2022
18%82%<1%
4.12
4.5
Nanette Heath
134W–74L career · 7 lines in 2022
24%76%<1%
4.09
4.5
Kandice Taylor
152W–168L career · 13 lines in 2022
48%52%<1%
4.00
4
Alisa Gardner
197W–48L career · 9 lines in 2022
<1%63%37%
3.96
4.5
Emily Wallace
93W–98L career · 8 lines in 2022
74%26%<1%
3.92
Jennifer Soulier
23W–11L career · 2 lines in 2022
88%12%<1%
3.84
4.5
Carlene Kemp
58W–195L career · 6 lines in 2022
92%8%<1%
3.82
4
Michele Halls
129W–67L career · 6 lines in 2022
2%95%3%
3.75
4
Sara Pinsoneault
89W–66L career · 11 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Holli Turner
82W–68L career · 10 lines in 2022
18%82%<1%
3.62
4
Michelle Moscon
90W–148L career · 7 lines in 2022
21%79%<1%
3.61
Jackie Grant
25W–44L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Janine Nesseth
29W–57L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Merri Gillespie
47W–77L career · 5 lines in 2022
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.