Teams

BP RED

2024 CTA TWILIGHT - DEN · WOMEN 3.5 - TWILIGHT

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / COLORADO

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
2024-09-05vs MC NAVYWon 20
W#1 DoublesJudith Law / Margarite Parker vs Julie Gall / Katy Plath6-0, 6-3
W#1 SinglesCayti Stein vs Gemma Koehler6-4, 6-7, 1-0
2024-08-23vs NJ REDSplit 11
W#1 DoublesClaudia Bricknell / Margarite Parker vs Jennifer Lyons / Sheila O'Neill6-2, 7-5
L#1 SinglesCayti Stein vs Kira Moore3-6, 2-6
2024-08-11vs LTC-D NAVYSplit 11
L#1 SinglesCayti Stein vs Shana Fonte0-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesClaudia Bricknell / Margarite Parker vs Christie Bibeau / Lauren Gardiner6-1, 6-4
2024-08-08vs RHCC BLUEWon 10
W#1 DoublesMelissa Richmond / Margarite Parker vs Rachel Kacmar / Brenda Christy7-6, 6-4
2024-08-01vs MC NAVYWon 10
W#2 DoublesMelissa Richmond / Margarite Parker vs Dana Stehno / Ursula Hamel6-0, 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 WOMEN 3.5 - TWILIGHT 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 3.24 estimated across 8 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.

3.51
Laura Read
published
3.46
Margarite Parker
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.33
Melissa Richmond
published
3.32
Amy Dre
published 3.5
Claudia Bricknell
published 3.5
3.14
Cayti Stein
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.13
Natalie Brader
published
3.03
Susan Gallo
published
3.00
Judith Law
published
Donna Cash
published
Loree Morris
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.

Melissa Richmond + Margarite Parker10166% games+10.9% vs expected
Judith Law + Susan Gallo11938% games−5.2% vs expected
Claudia Bricknell + Natalie Brader044 matchesnot enough data
Judith Law + Melissa Richmond314 matchesnot enough data
Amy Dre + Melissa Richmond224 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.

Laura Read
26W–13L career · no lines in 2024
<1%47%53%
3.51
3.5
Margarite Parker
52W–36L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%62%38%
3.46
Melissa Richmond
30W–17L career · no lines in 2024
1%87%12%
3.33
3.5
Amy Dre
4W–4L career · no lines in 2024
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Claudia Bricknell
0W–5L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Cayti Stein
29W–28L career · 3 lines in 2024
16%83%<1%
3.14
Natalie Brader
7W–18L career · no lines in 2024
18%82%<1%
3.13
Susan Gallo
13W–46L career · no lines in 2024
42%58%<1%
3.03
Judith Law
16W–40L career · no lines in 2024
51%49%<1%
3.00
Donna Cash
1W–3L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Loree Morris
6W–12L career · no lines in 2024
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.