Teams

LEBTC BLUE

2025 CTA ADULT 18-39 - DEN · WOMEN 3.5 - ADULT 18-39 - DEN

6 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2025-07-10vs GAC GOLDSplit 11
L#1 Female DoublesKayley Green / Marlyse Aguirre vs Madeline Luttrell / Lauren Hanzlik1-6, 3-6
W#2 Female SinglesEmily Penrod vs Annalisa Averill6-7, 6-1, 1-0
2025-07-03vs GR PURPLEWon 21
W#1 Female DoublesLauren Austin / Emily Penrod vs EMILY JENNINGS / Kayley Sudac7-5, 7-5
L#1 Female SinglesNatalie Borchelt vs Catherine Hosteny2-6, 4-6
W#2 Female SinglesMarlyse Aguirre vs Mauri Rapuzzi7-5, 6-4
2025-06-26vs SS-H ORANGEWon 10
W#2 Female SinglesVanessa Parsons vs Kiki Faircloth7-6, 4-6, 1-0
2025-06-19vs GAC GOLDLost 01
L#1 Female DoublesMarlyse Aguirre / Kayley Green vs Lauren Hanzlik / Annalisa Averill1-6, 2-6
2025-06-12vs SS-H ORANGELost 02
L#1 Female DoublesLauren Austin / Natalie Borchelt vs Brittany Norris / Becca Rinn7-6, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 Female SinglesMarlyse Aguirre vs Abby Butt7-5, 3-6, 1-0
2025-06-12vs GR PURPLESplit 11
L#1 Female DoublesIsabella Dalla Valle / Emily Penrod vs EMILY JENNINGS / Catherine Hosteny2-6, 6-7
W#1 Female SinglesVanessa Parsons vs Jordan Ziolkowski6-1, 7-5
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 standings12 teams · WOMEN 3.5 - ADULT 18-39 - DEN
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CHCC RED7017412136
2GAC GOLD60153794
3WP NAVY5214715142
4TTA BLUE4210820176
5GR PURPLE3371122186
6MC TEAL2481021159
7BP GREEN2471123172
8LEBTC BLUE2481024187
9CP WHITE25101125199
10SKY NAVY2541736234
11SS-H ORANGE1561226181
12BP NAVY1661531207

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 3.36 estimated across 5 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.

3.57
Marlyse Aguirre
usually #2 Female Singles 50%, also #1 Female Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.51
Emily Penrod
usually #1 Female Doubles 67%, also #2 Female Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.27
Kayley Green
published
3.26
Vanessa Parsons
usually #1 Female Singles 50%, also #2 Female Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.17
Natalie Borchelt
usually #1 Female Doubles 50%, also #1 Female Singles 50% · published 3.5
Nicole Palafox
published
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.

3.5
Marlyse Aguirre
114W–44L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%31%69%
3.57
3.5
Emily Penrod
21W–11L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%47%53%
3.51
Kayley Green
7W–7L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
3.27
3.5
Vanessa Parsons
58W–56L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.26
3.5
Natalie Borchelt
25W–14L career · type A · 2 lines in 2025
11%88%1%
3.17
Nicole Palafox
0W–5L 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.