Teams

CACM BLUE

2022 USTA ADULT 40 & OVER - DEN · WOMEN 3.0 - 40 & OVER

10 players · average NTRP 3.14 / 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
2022-07-19vs APR BLUELost 02
L#1 DoublesLeigh Kingman / Eden Parker vs Molly Garg / Danielle Remington3-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMaria Orton / Kristine Strayer vs Jessica Rae / Andrea Woolley7-6, 1-6, 0-1
2022-07-12vs WP SILVERLost 13
W#1 DoublesEden Parker / Michelle Curtiss vs Kara Gwinn / Neda Rasouli6-4, 6-3
L#1 SinglesPallavi Marulasiddappa vs Katie Portenga6-7, 0-6
L#2 DoublesMaria Orton / Leigh Kingman vs Brooke Webb / Justine McKinzie4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesMaureen Kiefer / Kristine Strayer vs Tiffany Smink / Valerie Kilzer5-7, 1-6
2022-07-05vs SKY BLUELost 04
L#1 DoublesMaria Orton / Elizabeth Anderman vs Sara Visser / Denise Briere3-6, 0-6
L#1 SinglesKristine Strayer vs Angie Sanders4-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesGina Bach / Michelle Curtiss vs Beth Godzich / Erin Mann6-7, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMaureen Kiefer / Pallavi Marulasiddappa vs Jennifer Fitzgerald / Catherine Hodges7-5, 2-6, 0-1
2022-06-28vs GTC REDWon 31
W#1 DoublesLeigh Kingman / Eden Parker vs Liza Baker / Brenda Emerson7-6, 6-1
L#1 SinglesPallavi Marulasiddappa vs Jill St. John6-7, 1-6
W#2 DoublesMaureen Kiefer / Michelle Curtiss vs Leah Johnson / Julie Woodle6-0, 6-3
W#3 DoublesBritt Nielsen / Kristine Strayer vs Kari Coughlon / Kaye Wonder6-4, 6-2
2022-06-21vs GTC PINKLost 13
W#1 DoublesLeigh Kingman / Maria Orton vs Suzann Gobis / Joyce Kennedy Raymes6-2, 6-3
L#1 SinglesBritt Nielsen vs Elizabeth Walker1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesMaureen Kiefer / Lisa Allen vs Peggy Moody / Joan Murphy7-5, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesKristine Strayer / Gina Bach vs Nancy Dickinson / Shelly Wesner3-6, 3-6
2022-06-14vs DTC REDSplit 22
W#1 DoublesEden Parker / Pallavi Marulasiddappa vs Alison Morrison / Sheila Tsai6-3, 1-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesBritt Nielsen vs Elisabeth Vezzani6-2, 5-7, 1-0
L#2 DoublesLisa Allen / Gina Bach vs Kristin Bokelman / Natasha Gallaway0-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesLeigh Kingman / Maureen Kiefer vs Elaine Golden Webster / Brenda Byrne4-6, 3-6
2022-06-07vs CP REDLost 13
L#1 DoublesLeigh Kingman / Michelle Curtiss vs Deborah Clark / Lena Ursten Hobbs4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesKristine Strayer vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#2 DoublesMaria Orton / Gina Bach vs Amy Twardowski / Susan Pesso2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesBritt Nielsen / Lisa Allen vs KRISTEN ALIX / Kelly Parker4-6, 6-0, 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 3.0 - 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 2.97 estimated across 7 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
Pallavi Marulasiddappa
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.54
Eden Parker
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.04
Kristine Strayer
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3
2.92
Maria Orton
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.67
Leigh Kingman
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3
2.54
Elizabeth Anderman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.27
Britt Nielsen
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
Gina Bach
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Maureen Kiefer
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Michelle Curtiss
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Michelle Curtiss + Pallavi Marulasiddappa5263% games+13.0% vs expected
Eden Parker + Leigh Kingman261355% games+4.5% vs expected
Eden Parker + Michelle Curtiss6255% games+4.3% vs expected
Britt Nielsen + Elizabeth Anderman4746% games+0.6% vs expected
Leigh Kingman + Michelle Curtiss3254% gamesnot enough data
Eden Parker + Maureen Kiefer134 matchesnot enough data
Leigh Kingman + Maureen Kiefer224 matchesnot enough data
Gina Bach + Elizabeth Anderman044 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.

4
Pallavi Marulasiddappa
156W–105L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.79
3.5
Eden Parker
134W–66L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%38%62%
3.54
3
Kristine Strayer
36W–25L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%38%62%
3.04
3
Maria Orton
73W–58L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%73%27%
2.92
3
Leigh Kingman
84W–81L career · 6 lines in 2022
10%90%1%
2.67
3
Elizabeth Anderman
34W–55L career · type A · 1 line in 2022
37%63%<1%
2.54
2.5
Britt Nielsen
28W–66L career · 4 lines in 2022
0%96%4%
2.27
Gina Bach
3W–20L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Maureen Kiefer
6W–22L career · 5 lines in 2022
not enough data
Michelle Curtiss
30W–11L career · 4 lines in 2022
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.