Teams

CACM RED

2023 USTA ADULT 40 & OVER - DEN · WOMEN 3.0 - 40 & OVER

6 players · average NTRP 3.00 / 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 →
Schedule7 played
2023-07-17vs PTC BLUESplit 11
W#1 DoublesLeigh Kingman / Eden Parker vs Alyson Tittman / Tara Treiberg6-2, 6-1
L#3 DoublesElizabeth Anderman / Britt Nielsen vs Rachel Lyons / Myrna Sobernheim4-6, 5-7
2023-07-10vs SKY GREENWon 20
W#1 SinglesLeigh Kingman vs Jennifer Fitzgerald6-1, 1-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesEden Parker / Maureen Kiefer vs Jennifer Pearson / Erin Mann6-4, 7-6
2023-07-03vs SS-D REDSplit 11
W#1 SinglesLeigh Kingman vs Suzette Loving6-2, 7-5
L#2 DoublesEden Parker / Maureen Kiefer vs Betsy Agnvall / Martha Bratt7-5, 3-6, 0-1
2023-06-26vs EM BLUESplit 11
W#2 DoublesLeigh Kingman / Eden Parker vs Judy Leuteneker / Kari Hale6-1, 6-3
L#3 DoublesElizabeth Anderman / Maureen Kiefer vs Jill Wichlens / Katy Kappler2-6, 6-7
2023-06-19vs VC BLUELost 02
L#1 DoublesEden Parker / Leigh Kingman vs Meghan Baker / Amy McDevitt3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesBritt Nielsen / Elizabeth Anderman vs Stephanie McCoy / Lindsay Needler-Turner1-6, 2-6
2023-06-12Lost 01
L#1 SinglesEden Parker vs Jennifer Pearson3-6, 4-6
2023-06-12vs PTC BLUESplit 11
L#1 SinglesLeigh Kingman vs Tara Treiberg4-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#2 DoublesBritt Nielsen / Elizabeth Anderman vs Alyson Tittman / Debra Sherwood1-6, 6-4, 1-0
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 3.0 - 40 & OVER 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 2.80 estimated across 6 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.

3.50
Eden Parker
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.12
Katherine Cuevas
published
2.67
Leigh Kingman
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.66
Izabela Rydel
published
2.54
Elizabeth Anderman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.32
Britt Nielsen
published 2.5
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.

Eden Parker + Leigh Kingman221156% games+6.5% 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.

3.5
Eden Parker
125W–58L career · 6 lines in 2023
<1%51%49%
3.50
Katherine Cuevas
38W–29L career · no lines in 2023
20%80%<1%
3.12
3
Leigh Kingman
84W–81L career · 6 lines in 2023
11%88%1%
2.67
Izabela Rydel
7W–16L career · no lines in 2023
12%87%1%
2.66
3
Elizabeth Anderman
34W–55L career · type A · 4 lines in 2023
38%62%<1%
2.54
2.5
Britt Nielsen
9W–19L career · no lines in 2023
0%90%10%
2.32

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.