Teams

Hazelrigg

2025 Neb. Adult 18&Over Tri-Level · 3.5

13 players · average NTRP 3.88 / NEBRASKA

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 →
Schedule6 played
2025-09-17vs JorgensenLost 12
W#1 DoublesLindsay Clayton / Katie Fagan vs Tory Jorgensen / Jennifer Lindner7-5, 6-4
L#2 DoublesTerri Fuxa / Denise Hazelrigg vs Karen Jennings / Beth Stiles3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesAnne Conlon / Claire Hogan vs Cindy Bluml / Nicolette Diamantis2-6, 3-6
2025-09-10vs NE/Banks-Thielen/Tri-3.5-4.5WLost 12
L#1 DoublesLindsay Clayton / Katie Mendlick vs Sara McArdle / Sara Banks3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesDenise Hazelrigg / Noelle Wegiel vs Jolene Johnson / Anne Olsen2-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesKasey Hesse / Claire Hogan vs Amanda Blumkin / Elana Harm6-2, 6-4
2025-09-03vs GradovilleLost 12
L#1 DoublesKatie Mendlick / Katie Fagan vs LIZ van der TORRE / Nina Ngo7-5, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesShelly Grote / Jessica Shefsky vs Lee Cooney / Elizabeth Flood7-6, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesAmanda Dana / Claire Hogan vs Kersten Higgins / Gina Alati6-0, 7-5
2025-08-27vs Heard/KingstonLost 03
L#1 DoublesShelly Grote / Katie Fagan vs Donna Wyse / Andrea Jensen6-7, 5-7
L#2 DoublesDenise Hazelrigg / Jessica Shefsky vs Kari Stempson / Kendra McGinnis6-7, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAmanda Dana / Claire Hogan vs Tara Arnold / Brittany Deupree3-6, 4-6
2025-08-20vs OM/Blake/Mid-TriWLost 02
L#2 DoublesNoelle Wegiel / Terri Fuxa vs Rachel Miller / Samantha LaPour-Masilko1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAnne Conlon / Kasey Hesse vs Alice Blake / Bethany Clark0-6, 1-6
2025-08-13vs OM/Tong-Vineyard/Mid-TriWLost 12
L#1 DoublesLindsay Clayton / Katie Mendlick vs Kendra Vineyard / Jennifer Zientarski2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesDenise Hazelrigg / Sarah McGowan vs Julie Seevers / Wei Tong6-4, 7-6
L#3 DoublesAnne Conlon / Kasey Hesse vs Rachel Prentiss / April Obermier3-6, 3-6
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 standings11 teams · 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1OM/Tong-Vineyard/Mid-TriW6014410132
2NE/Banks-Thielen/Tri-3.5-4.5W511449121
3OM/Blake/Mid-TriW4213515138
4LI/Wain/Mid-TriW4210821162
5LI/Tegler/Mid-TriW3311717148
6Heard/Kingston3381021175
7Mandigo3371124184
8Garcia2481021171
9Jorgensen2461227195
10Gradoville1541431205
11Hazelrigg0641428199

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.35 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.

3.79
Katie Fagan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Claire Hogan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.66
Jessica Shefsky
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.52
Katie Mendlick
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.45
Sarah McGowan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.44
Denise Hazelrigg
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.37
Amanda Dana
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.30
Terri Fuxa
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.24
Noelle Wegiel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.21
Lindsay Clayton
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.16
Kasey Hesse
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.08
Shelly Grote
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.92
Anne Conlon
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
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.

Katie Mendlick + Lindsay Clayton2545% games+3.6% vs expected
Denise Hazelrigg + Jessica Shefsky4255% games+2.6% vs expected
Denise Hazelrigg + Sarah McGowan6748% games+0.2% vs expected
Anne Conlon + Kasey Hesse3445% games−4.5% vs expected
Sarah McGowan + Shelly Grote2542% games−4.6% vs expected
Terri Fuxa + Denise Hazelrigg4848% games−5.6% vs expected
Noelle Wegiel + Denise Hazelrigg3544% gamesnot enough data
Terri Fuxa + Sarah McGowan2348% gamesnot 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.

Katie Fagan
39W–26L career · 3 lines in 2025
93%7%<1%
3.79
4
Claire Hogan
39W–13L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jessica Shefsky
40W–32L career · 2 lines in 2025
12%87%1%
3.66
Katie Mendlick
48W–26L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%43%57%
3.52
Sarah McGowan
22W–23L career · 1 line in 2025
63%37%<1%
3.45
4
Denise Hazelrigg
94W–97L career · 4 lines in 2025
65%35%<1%
3.44
4
Amanda Dana
29W–13L career · 5 lines in 2025
82%18%<1%
3.37
Terri Fuxa
42W–56L career · 2 lines in 2025
93%7%<1%
3.30
Noelle Wegiel
30W–71L career · 2 lines in 2025
97%3%<1%
3.24
Lindsay Clayton
54W–40L career · 3 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.21
Kasey Hesse
51W–51L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%13%87%
3.16
Shelly Grote
21W–40L career · 2 lines in 2025
>99%<1%<1%
3.08
3.5
Anne Conlon
54W–59L career · 6 lines in 2025
72%28%<1%
2.92

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.