Teams

Samuell Grand/Musick-Thornton W4.0S

2022 DTA 18 & Over ADULT S · S W. Saturday League

23 players · average NTRP 3.90 / TEXAS

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 →

Flight standings for S W. Saturday League 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 3.73 estimated across 19 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.

4.02
Meg Lohr
published
3.98
Sarah Sparling
published
3.97
Michelle Marketos
published
3.88
3.87
Ann Thornton
published 4
3.84
Bridget Goldman
published 4
3.77
Lola Lott
published
3.77
Marci Addington
published
3.76
Tanya Musick
published
3.75
Holly Lewis
published 4
3.75
Jacky Pincoffs
published 4
3.75
Lisa Nammari
published
3.69
Devon Bowling
published 4
3.68
Jill McGill
published
3.58
Angie Woltjen
published 4
3.57
Heather Neilson
published 4
3.54
Mary Beirute
published
3.50
Brenda Talavera
published 4
Emily Hoppers
published 3.5
3.22
Erin Shreiner
published 3.5
Camelia Shoemaker
published
Kim Wyly
published
Sonia Browne
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.

Lisa Nammari + Meg Lohr10175% games+18.0% vs expected
Tanya Musick + Sarah Sparling8558% games+5.9% vs expected
Lisa Nammari + Ann Thornton5158% gamesnot enough data
Lisa Nammari + Bridget Goldman303 matchesnot enough data
Lisa Nammari + Sarah Sparling303 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.

Meg Lohr
53W–14L career · no lines in 2022
<1%43%57%
4.02
Sarah Sparling
24W–10L career · no lines in 2022
<1%57%43%
3.98
Michelle Marketos
33W–18L career · no lines in 2022
<1%58%42%
3.97
Vincentia Onuegbulem
30W–16L career · no lines in 2022
<1%82%18%
3.88
4
Ann Thornton
51W–10L career · no lines in 2022
<1%83%16%
3.87
4
Bridget Goldman
25W–10L career · no lines in 2022
<1%89%10%
3.84
Lola Lott
12W–9L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.77
Marci Addington
13W–17L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.77
Tanya Musick
30W–18L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%3%
3.76
4
Holly Lewis
23W–11L career · no lines in 2022
2%95%3%
3.75
4
Jacky Pincoffs
6W–6L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.75
Lisa Nammari
36W–15L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Devon Bowling
12W–11L career · no lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.69
Jill McGill
37W–14L career · no lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.68
4
Angie Woltjen
7W–7L career · no lines in 2022
26%74%<1%
3.58
4
Heather Neilson
2W–8L career · no lines in 2022
29%71%<1%
3.57
Mary Beirute
12W–7L career · no lines in 2022
37%63%<1%
3.54
4
Brenda Talavera
8W–6L career · no lines in 2022
50%50%<1%
3.50
3.5
Emily Hoppers
0W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Erin Shreiner
3W–3L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.22
Camelia Shoemaker
1W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Kim Wyly
0W–5L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Sonia Browne
2W–1L career · no 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.