Teams

WI Adult 18&O 4.5W MALT Baugus

2025 WI Adult 18 & Over · WI Adult 18 & Over 4.5 Women

15 players · average NTRP 4.22 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-07-28vs WI Adult 18&O 4.5W MALT KolpekLost 12
W#1 SinglesAmberlee Baugus vs Kendall Witt6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesMorgan Lee / Michelle Tallentyre vs Jessie Bathe / Renee Nelson6-7, 3-6
L#2 SinglesSamantha Saetang vs Sydney Verbauwhede5-7, 1-6
2025-07-21vs WI Adult 18&O 4.5W MALT O'NeillLost 12
W#1 DoublesMichelle Tallentyre / Morgan Lee vs Leah O'Connell / Olivia Nichols1-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#1 SinglesAmberlee Baugus vs Elizabeth Reuter3-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 SinglesSamantha Saetang vs Morgan Wilson3-6, 5-7
2025-07-07vs WI Adult 18&O 4.5W MALT KolpekWon 21
L#1 DoublesMichelle Tallentyre / Gillian Drier vs Sydney Verbauwhede / Allyson Verbauwhede1-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesAmberlee Baugus vs Carol Polipnick6-2, 6-1
W#2 SinglesSamantha Saetang vs Kendall Witt6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2025-06-30vs WI Adult 18&O 4.5W MALT O'NeillSplit 11
L#1 DoublesEmily King / Amberlee Baugus vs Leah O'Connell / Olivia Nichols4-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesGillian Drier / Zoe Tesone vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2025-06-16vs WI Adult 18&O 4.5W MALT KolpekSplit 11
L#1 DoublesSamantha Saetang / Gillian Drier vs Sydney Verbauwhede / Allyson Verbauwhede4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesAmberlee Baugus / Zoe Tesone vs Gina Kolpek / Andrea Kreft6-3, 6-3
2025-06-09vs WI Adult 18&O 4.5W MALT O'NeillSplit 11
L#1 DoublesEmily King / Gillian Drier vs Leah O'Connell / Olivia Nichols3-6, 2-6
W#2 SinglesAmberlee Baugus vs Kayla O'Neill6-3, 6-1
2025-05-19vs WI Adult 18&O 4.5W MALT KolpekLost 12
L#1 DoublesEmily King / Michelle Tallentyre vs Cecile Fuchs / Sydney Verbauwhede0-6, 3-6
W#1 SinglesSamantha Saetang vs Kendall Witt6-4, 7-5
L#2 DoublesAmberlee Baugus / Gillian Drier vs Gina Kolpek / Allyson Verbauwhede2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-05-12vs WI Adult 18&O 4.5W MALT O'NeillWon 10
W#1 DoublesMichelle Tallentyre / Samantha Saetang vs Leah O'Connell / Olivia Nichols6-1, 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 WI Adult 18 & Over 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 3.96 estimated across 12 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.

4.32
Samantha Saetang
usually #1 Singles 39%, also #2 Singles 39% · published 4.5
4.25
Michelle Tallentyre
usually #1 Doubles 82%, also #2 Doubles 18% · published 4.5
4.14
Amberlee Baugus
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 21% · published 4.5
4.08
Morgan Lee
published
4.06
Annie Zlevor
published 4.5
4.03
Zoe Tesone
usually #1 Singles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
3.98
Emily King
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 4
3.96
Gillian Drier
usually #1 Doubles 77%, also #2 Doubles 23% · published 4
3.86
Emma Lai
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
Aeryn Olson
usually #2 Singles 43%, also #1 Singles 29% · published 4
Eunsil Oh
usually #2 Singles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.70
Lily Montgomery
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.59
Nadia Gonzalez
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
3.52
Juliana Hahn
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published
Niki Jones
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.

Amberlee Baugus + Gillian Drier8169% games+8.1% vs expected
Emma Lai + Eunsil Oh4448% games+6.7% vs expected
Gillian Drier + Samantha Saetang14664% games+5.4% vs expected
Michelle Tallentyre + Samantha Saetang20462% games+2.0% vs expected
Emma Lai + Emily King8253% games+0.8% vs expected
Morgan Lee + Amberlee Baugus6452% games−3.8% vs expected
Gillian Drier + Michelle Tallentyre9357% games−7.9% vs expected
Amberlee Baugus + Samantha Saetang7260% games−13.1% 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.

4.5
Samantha Saetang
196W–67L career · 13 lines in 2025
1%91%8%
4.32
4.5
Michelle Tallentyre
142W–31L career · 11 lines in 2025
3%95%3%
4.25
4.5
Amberlee Baugus
228W–105L career · 14 lines in 2025
14%85%<1%
4.14
Morgan Lee
61W–41L career · no lines in 2025
28%72%<1%
4.08
4.5
Annie Zlevor
12W–21L career · no lines in 2025
33%67%<1%
4.06
Zoe Tesone
65W–27L career · 6 lines in 2025
40%60%<1%
4.03
4
Emily King
54W–19L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%55%44%
3.98
4
Gillian Drier
168W–64L career · 13 lines in 2025
<1%62%38%
3.96
4
Emma Lai
35W–26L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%85%15%
3.86
4
Aeryn Olson
9W–22L career · 7 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Eunsil Oh
58W–49L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Lily Montgomery
37W–35L career · 6 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.70
Nadia Gonzalez
15W–19L career · 6 lines in 2025
24%76%<1%
3.59
Juliana Hahn
38W–45L career · 7 lines in 2025
44%56%<1%
3.52
Niki Jones
29W–37L 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.