Teams

MC GOLD

2024 CTA TWILIGHT - DEN · WOMEN 2.5 - TWILIGHT

8 players · average NTRP 2.88 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2024-09-04vs MVCC NAVYWon 10
W#2 DoublesPaige Doherty / Erin Gleason vs Heather Schram / Kristina Klug4-6, 6-2, 1-0
2024-08-28vs RHCC PURPLELost 01
L#1 DoublesPaige Doherty / Amy Hank vs Lindsey Fleener / Jennifer Kos4-6, 4-6
2024-08-21vs GR BLUEWon 20
W#1 DoublesPaige Doherty / Lorrie Johnson vs Cassie Urban / Summer Vasilas6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesSharlene Funk / Jillian Clark vs Jessica Groskopf / Shannon Kelly6-2, 6-1
2024-08-14vs RHCC GREENWon 10
W#1 DoublesSharlene Funk / Erin Gleason vs Chrissy Costello / Amanda Vrbas6-3, 6-3
2024-08-07vs BP REDLost 01
L#1 DoublesSharlene Funk / Erin Gleason vs Erica Younkin / Tazia Strausser6-1, 5-7, 0-1
2024-07-31vs BCST REDSplit 11
W#1 DoublesAmy Hank / Sharlene Funk vs Leslie Aranjo / Ann Symalla6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesPaige Doherty vs Laura Blair6-7, 2-6
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 2.5 - 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 2.25 estimated across 7 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.

Amy Hank
published 3
2.44
Ashley Sakker
published 3
2.36
Sharlene Funk
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.36
Lorrie Johnson
published
2.33
Jillian Clark
published
2.28
Paige Doherty
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 2.5
2.16
Tara Cronin
published
1.79
Robin Allis
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.

Jillian Clark + Amy Hank9457% games+6.7% vs expected
Paige Doherty + Jillian Clark6163% games+6.4% vs expected
Paige Doherty + Lorrie Johnson101246% games+3.4% vs expected
Sharlene Funk + Lorrie Johnson1628% games−9.1% vs expected
Sharlene Funk + Jillian Clark3246% gamesnot enough data
Sharlene Funk + Paige Doherty213 matchesnot enough data
Amy Hank + Lorrie Johnson303 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.

3
Amy Hank
19W–10L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Ashley Sakker
14W–14L career · no lines in 2024
66%34%<1%
2.44
3
Sharlene Funk
69W–70L career · type A · 4 lines in 2024
84%16%<1%
2.36
Lorrie Johnson
23W–52L career · no lines in 2024
84%16%<1%
2.36
Jillian Clark
34W–18L career · no lines in 2024
0%88%12%
2.33
2.5
Paige Doherty
42W–50L career · 4 lines in 2024
0%94%6%
2.28
Tara Cronin
13W–12L career · no lines in 2024
0%99%1%
2.16
Robin Allis
2W–10L career · no lines in 2024
0%>99%<1%
1.79

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.