Teams

KY/LOU/ACKERMANN

2025 USTA LEAGUE 18 & Over ADULT LOUISVILLE · 4.5 Women

16 players · average NTRP 4.50 / KENTUCKY

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 →
Schedule4 played
2025-02-28vs KY/LOU/JACKSONLost 23
W#1 DoublesLaurabeth Schmidt / Allison Scanlan vs Beth Salamon / Hanna Newstadt6-2, 6-1
W#1 SinglesKaelin Roberts vs Anna Lask6-2, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesEllen Stubbs / Amy Gulledge vs Haniel Leppert / Kimberly Mrozek1-6, 0-6
L#2 SinglesAshlyn Roberts vs Taylor Jackson4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAimee Ackermann / Carolina Barboza vs Hallie Pennington / Kim Cox6-2, 4-6, 0-1
2025-02-22vs KY/LOU/OCONNELLWon 32
W#1 DoublesKimberly Morton / Karen Mueller vs Caitlin Mann / Abby Schuhmann3-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#1 SinglesEllen Stubbs vs Claire Schroering3-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesAllison Scanlan / Jill Roby vs Mary Beth Zarobsky / Sara Moore6-4, 7-6
W#2 SinglesMelody Medley vs Mary Caroline Gray6-2, 6-1
L#3 DoublesElita Roberts / Kaelin Roberts vs Sarah Jane Dufour / Anne Woosley6-7, 1-6
2025-02-02vs KY/LOU/LAMPTON/KULLWon 32
L#1 DoublesElita Roberts / Kaelin Roberts vs Morgan Bauer / Sarah Wilder4-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesMelody Medley vs Alisha Kull5-7, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAimee Ackermann / Amy Gulledge vs Jill Ricketts / Brie Roberts1-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesEllen Stubbs vs Caroline Ballard6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMarnie Ochoa / Allison Scanlan vs Shannon Lampton / Patricia Hooker6-3, 6-2
2025-01-19vs KY/LOU/BROWNFIELD/OCONNELLWon 50
W#1 DoublesLaurabeth Schmidt / Elita Roberts vs Cheryl Frazee / Suzanne Bush6-4, 6-3
W#1 SinglesKaelin Roberts vs Regan Ackerman6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesJill Roby / Kimberly Morton vs Michelle Harper / Morgan Meyer6-1, 6-1
W#2 SinglesAshlyn Roberts vs Maggi Donnell6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAngela Clark / Karen Mueller vs Kelly Brownfield / Julie Dayton6-1, 6-3
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 4.5 Women 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 4.14 estimated across 14 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.

4.57
Carolina Barboza
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.38
Kaelin Roberts
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #1 Doubles 14% · published
4.35
Ellen Stubbs
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published 4.5
4.30
Marnie Ochoa
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
4.25
Laurabeth Schmidt
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Ashlyn Roberts
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 4.5
4.18
Allison Scanlan
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 4.5
4.18
Jill Roby
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
4.16
Melody Medley
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
4.15
Amy Gulledge
usually #2 Doubles 71%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
4.08
Aimee Ackermann
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.02
Karen Mueller
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.80
Elita Roberts
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.76
Kimberly Morton
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.73
Nina Scott
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Shannon Budnick
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.

Jill Roby + Kimberly Morton4261% games+5.9% vs expected
Nina Scott + Elita Roberts7264% games+3.5% vs expected
Aimee Ackermann + Karen Mueller5751% games−4.0% vs expected
Aimee Ackermann + Amy Gulledge314 matchesnot enough data
Laurabeth Schmidt + Ellen Stubbs303 matchesnot enough data
Allison Scanlan + Marnie Ochoa213 matchesnot enough data
Elita Roberts + Kaelin Roberts033 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.

5
Carolina Barboza
9W–6L career · type D · 1 line in 2025
30%70%<1%
4.57
Kaelin Roberts
11W–8L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%82%18%
4.38
4.5
Ellen Stubbs
18W–10L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%87%12%
4.35
Marnie Ochoa
31W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
1%92%7%
4.30
Laurabeth Schmidt
24W–12L career · 6 lines in 2025
3%95%3%
4.25
4.5
Ashlyn Roberts
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
4.5
Allison Scanlan
43W–15L career · 6 lines in 2025
8%91%1%
4.18
Jill Roby
73W–28L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%9%91%
4.18
Melody Medley
40W–11L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%12%88%
4.16
4.5
Amy Gulledge
34W–21L career · 7 lines in 2025
12%87%<1%
4.15
4.5
Aimee Ackermann
22W–26L career · 2 lines in 2025
27%73%<1%
4.08
Karen Mueller
56W–42L career · 2 lines in 2025
44%56%<1%
4.02
4
Elita Roberts
33W–14L career · 9 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.80
Kimberly Morton
25W–20L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
3.76
Nina Scott
26W–21L career · 5 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.73
Shannon Budnick
0W–6L career · no lines in 2025
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.