Teams

HRCA-N GREEN

2024 USTA ADULT 40 & OVER - DEN · WOMEN 3.5 - 40 & OVER

10 players · average NTRP 3.36 / 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
2024-07-18vs HG REDLost 13
L#1 DoublesCinda Nab / Joyce Naylon vs Ashley Herndon / Nicole Nies0-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesPatricia Martin vs Whitney Cain0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesMelinda Shaffer / Deborah Miller vs Amy Silverman / Heidi David4-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesDana Anderson / Julie Johns vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2024-07-15vs LTFC PINKSplit 22
L#1 DoublesDeborah Miller / Dana Anderson vs Erin Clark / Audrey Moskowitz3-6, 3-6
W#1 SinglesAmy Tharp vs Lisa Lash6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesShannon Porter / Colleen Krebsbach vs Kyle Davis / Kristin Linhardt6-0, 6-2
L#3 DoublesMelinda Shaffer / Patricia Martin vs Soon Hee Kolrud / Virginia Gamble3-6, 4-6
2024-07-11vs HW BLUELost 13
L#1 DoublesShannon Porter / Cinda Nab vs Carol Decker / Karla Davies2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#1 SinglesAmy Tharp vs Jennifer Johnson2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesColleen Krebsbach / Julie Johns vs Stephanie Luther / Corby McGrath2-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesMelinda Shaffer / Adele Rhinehart vs Sophia Burke / Kathe Gouin5-7, 6-3, 1-0
2024-06-27vs GCC GREENSplit 22
L#1 DoublesDeborah Miller / Julie Johns vs Hilary McDonald / Marcy White0-6, 0-6
W#1 SinglesShannon Porter vs Ru Schanman6-1, 7-5
W#2 DoublesAdele Rhinehart / Dana Anderson vs Merry Logan / Lauren Sveen6-4, 7-5
L#3 DoublesJoyce Naylon / Cinda Nab vs Andrea Carrington / Shannon Avis7-6, 2-6, 0-1
2024-06-24vs KC-CC GREENSplit 22
L#1 DoublesJoyce Naylon / Dana Anderson vs Jami Jensen / Joelle Arne6-2, 6-7, 0-1
L#1 SinglesPatricia Martin vs Karen Logsdon1-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesColleen Krebsbach / Julie Johns vs Sharon Seemann / Susan Khanna7-5, 6-4
W#3 DoublesAdele Rhinehart / Deborah Miller vs Kit Fitzgerald / Dawn Robbins6-1, 6-0
2024-06-13vs SS-LT GREENWon 30
W#1 DoublesAdele Rhinehart / Melinda Shaffer vs Julie Fujita / Ellen Thompson6-2, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJoyce Naylon / Shannon Porter vs CELESTE SIADE / Karen McIntire6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesDana Anderson / Julie Johns vs Carin Buster / Andrea Bailey6-3, 6-0
2024-06-06vs KC-CC BLUELost 13
L#1 DoublesColleen Krebsbach / Julie Johns vs Elizabeth Low / Carolyn Souk4-6, 4-6
W#1 SinglesAmy Tharp vs Kathleen Schuster6-4, 6-4
L#2 DoublesDeborah Miller / Melinda Shaffer vs Danielle Steadman / Elizabeth Mathews3-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJoyce Naylon / Cinda Nab vs Holly Sharpeta / Lesley Denning3-6, 7-5, 0-1
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 - 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 3.05 estimated across 9 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.

3.35
Shannon Porter
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.24
Melinda Shaffer
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.21
Adele Rhinehart
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.13
Dana Anderson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.04
Colleen Krebsbach
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.99
Amy Tharp
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
2.90
Julie Johns
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.88
Cinda Nab
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.75
Joyce Naylon
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
Patricia Martin
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Adele Rhinehart + Julie Johns2448% games+5.1% vs expected
Adele Rhinehart + Melinda Shaffer151450% games+3.6% vs expected
Cinda Nab + Shannon Porter2551% games−0.1% vs expected
Melinda Shaffer + Julie Johns31042% games−1.6% vs expected
Dana Anderson + Melinda Shaffer3843% games−3.2% vs expected
Dana Anderson + Adele Rhinehart61349% games−3.3% vs expected
Colleen Krebsbach + Julie Johns6448% games−3.5% vs expected
Cinda Nab + Joyce Naylon171846% games−4.4% 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.

Shannon Porter
47W–61L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%88%12%
3.35
Melinda Shaffer
46W–71L career · 5 lines in 2024
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Adele Rhinehart
96W–104L career · 4 lines in 2024
5%93%1%
3.21
3.5
Dana Anderson
40W–85L career · 4 lines in 2024
15%85%<1%
3.13
3.5
Colleen Krebsbach
63W–75L career · 4 lines in 2024
39%61%<1%
3.04
3.5
Amy Tharp
24W–62L career · 3 lines in 2024
54%46%<1%
2.99
3.5
Julie Johns
29W–69L career · 6 lines in 2024
78%22%<1%
2.90
3
Cinda Nab
52W–74L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%81%19%
2.88
3
Joyce Naylon
113W–170L career · 5 lines in 2024
3%95%3%
2.75
Patricia Martin
0W–19L career · 3 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.