Teams

GSCC BLUE

2026 CTA TWILIGHT - MOUNTAINS · WOMEN 3.5 - TWILIGHT - MOUNTAINS

7 players · average NTRP 3.38 / 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 →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-24vs BASALT GOLDWon 21
W#1 DoublesSiri Olsen / Stacey Adams vs Ashley Richardson / Monica Cohan6-0, 6-2
L#1 SinglesAmy Roggie vs Denise Taylor6-4, 3-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesAnne Sale / Mary Boyd vs Corin Brucker / Jennifer Soho6-2, 6-2
2026-08-17vs RVR GOLDLost 12
L#1 DoublesKsana Oglesby / Siri Olsen vs Carla Ostberg / Makenzie Eshelman4-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesMary Boyd vs Yoko Smith Rhodes5-7, 2-6
W#2 DoublesSasha Enewold / Amy Roggie vs Brooke Stott / Audrey Imhoff6-3, 6-3
2026-08-10vs CROWN REDWon 20
W#1 DoublesAmy Roggie / Mary Boyd vs Judi Simecek / Kathy Robinson6-4, 7-5
W#2 DoublesSiri Olsen / Ksana Oglesby vs Andrea Olson / Kelly Capri6-4, 6-1
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 3.5 - TWILIGHT - MOUNTAINS 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 3.35 estimated across 6 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.

3.62
Stacey Adams
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.46
Siri Olsen
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.43
Amy Roggie
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.42
Anne Sale
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.38
Mary Boyd
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.80
Ksana Oglesby
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
Sasha Enewold
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Ksana Oglesby + Siri Olsen10561% games+9.1% vs expected
Anne Sale + Stacey Adams6455% games−1.0% vs expected
Anne Sale + Siri Olsen20171% games−1.1% vs expected
Amy Roggie + Mary Boyd5256% games−2.4% vs expected
Anne Sale + Amy Roggie2454% gamesnot enough data
Anne Sale + Ksana Oglesby134 matchesnot enough data
Stacey Adams + Siri Olsen404 matchesnot enough data
Sasha Enewold + Amy Roggie303 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.

Stacey Adams
17W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%20%80%
3.62
3.5
Siri Olsen
95W–19L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%62%38%
3.46
3.5
Amy Roggie
95W–47L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
3.43
3.5
Anne Sale
88W–37L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%72%28%
3.42
Mary Boyd
10W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%80%19%
3.38
3
Ksana Oglesby
26W–30L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%8%
2.80
Sasha Enewold
5W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
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.