Teams

Liberty Park Tennis-Knight/Taylor

2023 USTA Adult 40 & Over · 4.0W PM

21 players · average NTRP 3.79 / UTAH

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
2023-08-08vs Cottonwood Club-WarrenSplit 11
W#1 DoublesAmy Earl / Natalie Clawson vs Kathy Miller-Rees / Donna Pizza2-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#3 DoublesElaine Day / Tina Marriott vs Lois Peterson / Sara Green2-6, 2-6
2023-08-01Lost 01
L#1 DoublesKathryn Tagge / Claire McNulty vs Teri Bishop / Gwen Schulz4-6, 0-6
2023-07-25Won 10
W#2 DoublesMichele Smelko / Claire McNulty vs Alyson Ellis / Julie Labrum6-3, 7-6
2023-07-18Lost 01
L#2 DoublesElaine Day / Tina Marriott vs Tyra Cook / Lisa Mayberry2-6, 1-6
2023-06-27Lost 01
L#1 SinglesNatalie Clawson vs Heidi Brophy4-6, 1-6
2023-06-24Won 10
W#1 DoublesClaire McNulty / Michele Smelko vs Christine Neeleman / Sharlene Enloe6-3, 6-3
2023-06-20Won 10
W#1 DoublesClaire McNulty / Michele Smelko vs Regina Johnson / Amy Johnson7-6, 3-6, 1-0
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 4.0W PM 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 3.50 estimated across 17 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.

3.95
Alisa Gardner
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.83
Daisy Carlson
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.74
Amy Earl
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.74
Kim Cronin
usually #1 Doubles 61%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.71
Tina Marriott
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.69
Chandi Hurd
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.68
Misty Morrow
published 4
3.65
Emily Benton
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.62
Annette Knight
usually #1 Singles 38%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.54
Michele Smelko
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.46
Claire McNulty
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.37
Michelle Maxfield
usually #2 Doubles 42%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.36
Gretel Sampson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Alyssa Larson
published 3.5
3.23
Alena Taylor
usually #3 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published 3.5
3.18
Kathryn Tagge
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.14
Manal Hall
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
2.63
Elaine Day
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
Jenny DeWaal
published
Lisa Stebbing
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Natalie Clawson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 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.

Annette Knight + Emily Benton4264% games+14.7% vs expected
Gretel Sampson + Alisa Gardner11366% games+14.4% vs expected
Amy Earl + Kim Cronin4262% games+13.1% vs expected
Kim Cronin + Alisa Gardner14068% games+10.9% vs expected
Michele Smelko + Claire McNulty6450% games+10.1% vs expected
Emily Benton + Alisa Gardner11266% games+9.5% vs expected
Amy Earl + Alisa Gardner21367% games+9.3% vs expected
Manal Hall + Lisa Stebbing1443% games+7.6% 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
Alisa Gardner
197W–48L career · 8 lines in 2023
<1%64%36%
3.95
4
Daisy Carlson
185W–93L career · 4 lines in 2023
1%88%11%
3.83
4
Amy Earl
111W–45L career · 5 lines in 2023
4%92%3%
3.74
4
Kim Cronin
380W–237L career · 18 lines in 2023
5%92%3%
3.74
4
Tina Marriott
40W–42L career · 2 lines in 2023
6%92%2%
3.71
4
Chandi Hurd
180W–143L career · 3 lines in 2023
8%90%1%
3.69
4
Misty Morrow
79W–60L career · no lines in 2023
10%89%1%
3.68
Emily Benton
150W–123L career · 3 lines in 2023
14%85%1%
3.65
4
Annette Knight
58W–66L career · 8 lines in 2023
21%79%<1%
3.62
Michele Smelko
35W–30L career · 3 lines in 2023
40%60%<1%
3.54
4
Claire McNulty
39W–51L career · 4 lines in 2023
62%38%<1%
3.46
Michelle Maxfield
206W–139L career · 12 lines in 2023
82%18%<1%
3.37
3.5
Gretel Sampson
200W–198L career · 12 lines in 2023
<1%83%16%
3.36
3.5
Alyssa Larson
21W–32L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
3.5
Alena Taylor
178W–200L career · 8 lines in 2023
5%92%3%
3.23
Kathryn Tagge
52W–104L career · 3 lines in 2023
10%89%1%
3.18
3.5
Manal Hall
111W–167L career · 10 lines in 2023
16%83%<1%
3.14
3
Elaine Day
123W–244L career · 4 lines in 2023
17%83%<1%
2.63
Jenny DeWaal
30W–26L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Lisa Stebbing
95W–57L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Natalie Clawson
42W–26L career · 2 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.