Teams

LT BLUE

2026 TRIO - NOCO · WOMEN 3.0 - TRIO - NOCO

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 →
Schedule4 played
2026-04-25vs HMTC PURPLELost 03
L#1 DoublesTiffany Croci / Shirley Moore vs Michelle Fang / Kelsi Wagner6-7, 2-6
L#1 SinglesLee Anne Kempton vs Molly Bond5-7, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJanet Krech / Mary Wright vs Susan Seiler / Jamie Cole3-6, 2-6
2026-04-18vs FCCC ORANGELost 03
L#1 DoublesLee Anne Kempton / Shirley Moore vs Tara Delaney / Hannah Burns1-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesKate Eberle vs Chanel Elliott1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJanet Krech / Mary Wright vs Victoria Archer / Erin Rasmussen1-6, 4-6
2026-04-11vs CSU GREENWon 20
W#1 DoublesLee Anne Kempton / Shirley Moore vs Holly Rodriguez / Amy Molina6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesTiffany Croci / Kate Eberle vs Wendy Sprague / Hollie Millican6-2, 6-4
2026-03-28vs MLF WHITEWon 21
L#1 DoublesTiffany Croci / Kate Eberle vs Bethany Chambers / Magdalena Joyce3-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesPamela Massaro vs Jessica Gartner6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLee Anne Kempton / Mary Wright vs Kristen McKnight / Gina Fox6-3, 3-6, 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 - TRIO - NOCO 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 2.72 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.

2.82
Shirley Moore
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.76
Janet Krech
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.76
Lee Anne Kempton
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.67
Kate Eberle
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.67
Tiffany Croci
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.64
Pamela Massaro
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
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.

Lee Anne Kempton + Pamela Massaro6258% games+11.2% vs expected
Shirley Moore + Pamela Massaro4445% games−2.2% vs expected
Tiffany Croci + Kate Eberle314 matchesnot enough data
Janet Krech + Pamela Massaro123 matchesnot enough data
Shirley Moore + Lee Anne Kempton123 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.

Shirley Moore
34W–27L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
2.82
3
Janet Krech
43W–51L career · 2 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.76
3
Lee Anne Kempton
57W–72L career · 4 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.76
Kate Eberle
3W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
2.67
Tiffany Croci
23W–25L career · 3 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
2.67
3
Pamela Massaro
31W–37L career · 1 line in 2026
16%83%<1%
2.64

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.