Teams

Takser/PH

2023 TUL MIXED 55 & Over League · 8.0 MIXED

20 players · average NTRP 3.90 / OKLAHOMA

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 →
Schedule5 played
2023-06-25vs Tulsa: Hartfelder/ISWon 21
L#1 DoublesCurtis Powell / Allison Eve vs Kelly Pearson / Tom Schmidt3-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#2 DoublesRonnie Acebo / Dana Dudley vs David Amon / Shelley Bradshaw6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesScott Hjelm / Kerry Taylor vs Janet Chambers / Bill Chambers6-3, 6-7, 1-0
2023-06-16vs Tulsa: Hartfelder/ISWon 20
W#1 DoublesScott Hjelm / Sandra Leos vs Melinda Clonts / Tom Schmidt6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesRonnie Acebo / Dana Dudley vs Jennifer Hartfelder / Michael Pearson6-2, 2-1
2023-06-11vs Tulsa: Hartfelder/ISLost 12
L#1 DoublesSteven Oliver / Sandra Leos vs J Denne / Kathy Blackim4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesRonnie Acebo / Dana Dudley vs Jeff Borgstrom / Shelley Bradshaw1-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesCurtis Powell / Kimberly Oliver vs Scott Hartfelder / Kelly Pearson6-2, 6-7, 1-0
2023-06-02vs Tulsa: Hartfelder/ISLost 03
L#1 DoublesMark Lehman / Michelle Oatman vs Scott Hartfelder / Kelly Pearson7-6, 2-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesLori Lassman / Kent Williams vs Jennifer Hartfelder / Michael Pearson4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesMichelle Hassell / Jeff Hassell vs Jeff Borgstrom / Shelley Bradshaw2-6, 2-6
2023-05-19vs Tulsa: Hartfelder/ISLost 12
L#1 DoublesMark Lehman / Kerry Taylor vs J Denne / Kathy Blackim2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesH Treak Tasker / Allison Eve vs John Butts Jr / Janet Chambers6-1, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesScott Coulson / Sandra Leos vs Bill Chambers / Tammy Mathias6-3, 7-6
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 standings2 teams · 8.0 MIXED
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Tulsa: Hartfelder/IS328718143
2Takser/PH237818137

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 3.62 estimated across 15 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.

4.15
Curtis Powell
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.09
H Treak Tasker
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.98
Michelle Hassell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.91
Scott Hjelm
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.85
Ronnie Acebo
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.79
Sandra Leos
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.78
Lori Lassman
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.60
Michelle Oatman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.53
Mary Jo Tasker
published
3.48
Kerry Taylor
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.40
Gail Gillock
published 3.5
3.26
Allison Eve
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.19
Dana Dudley
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.17
Kimberly Oliver
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.13
Kent Williams
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Jeff Hassell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Mark Lehman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Scott Coulson
published
Steven Oliver
published
Thomas Gillock
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.

Kimberly Oliver + Curtis Powell6452% games+9.3% vs expected
Kerry Taylor + Mark Lehman3252% games−2.8% vs expected
Ronnie Acebo + Dana Dudley2351% games−3.2% vs expected
H Treak Tasker + Kimberly Oliver5451% games−3.5% vs expected
H Treak Tasker + Allison Eve134 matchesnot enough data
Jeff Hassell + Michelle Hassell044 matchesnot enough data
Mary Jo Tasker + Mark Lehman404 matchesnot enough data
Ronnie Acebo + Allison Eve033 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.

4.5
Curtis Powell
36W–52L career · 2 lines in 2023
12%88%<1%
4.15
4.5
H Treak Tasker
33W–32L career · 1 line in 2023
25%75%<1%
4.09
Michelle Hassell
81W–53L career · 1 line in 2023
<1%57%43%
3.98
Scott Hjelm
86W–67L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%76%24%
3.91
Ronnie Acebo
93W–81L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%87%12%
3.85
Sandra Leos
82W–54L career · 3 lines in 2023
1%93%6%
3.79
Lori Lassman
19W–37L career · 1 line in 2023
2%94%5%
3.78
Michelle Oatman
48W–45L career · 1 line in 2023
22%78%<1%
3.60
Mary Jo Tasker
67W–78L career · no lines in 2023
41%59%<1%
3.53
Kerry Taylor
39W–41L career · 2 lines in 2023
56%44%<1%
3.48
3.5
Gail Gillock
47W–52L career · no lines in 2023
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Allison Eve
62W–73L career · 2 lines in 2023
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Dana Dudley
162W–111L career · 3 lines in 2023
8%92%1%
3.19
Kimberly Oliver
80W–75L career · 1 line in 2023
10%89%<1%
3.17
Kent Williams
62W–77L career · 1 line in 2023
16%83%<1%
3.13
Jeff Hassell
19W–25L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Mark Lehman
81W–37L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Scott Coulson
31W–28L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Steven Oliver
41W–17L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Thomas Gillock
26W–14L career · no lines in 2023
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.