Teams

Liberty Park Tennis-Sampson/Taylor

2024 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 4.0W PM

18 players · average NTRP 3.82 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2024-05-28Lost 01
L#1 SinglesSabrena Suite-Mangum vs Cambria Cook1-6, 6-3, 0-1
2024-05-21Lost 01
L#2 DoublesKim Cronin / Sabrena Suite-Mangum vs Teri Bishop / Kortney Osborne4-6, 4-6
2024-05-14vs Liberty Park Tennis-Day/McNultyLost 01
L#1 DoublesEmily Benton / Natalie Clawson vs DeeAnn Henderson / Michele Smelko6-4, 2-6, 0-1
2024-05-04vs Cottonwood Club-Warren/BriesacherLost 01
L#3 DoublesLisa Stebbing / Mary Kathryn Harman vs Christine Littleford / Simone McInnis3-6, 4-6
2024-04-30vs Liberty Park Tennis-TieffWon 10
W#2 DoublesKatie Swensen / Natalie Clawson vs Kalee King / Lindsay Bianucci6-4, 6-4
2024-04-16Lost 01
L#1 DoublesKatie Swensen / Natalie Clawson vs Kristi Warren / Anji DowDell4-6, 1-6
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 standings5 teams · 4.0W PM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Cottonwood Club-Warren/Briesacher53281232288
2Sunpro-Bishop53231738318
3Liberty Park Tennis-Day/McNulty35162454394
4Ivory Ridge-Smith/Allen35122859392
5Liberty Park Tennis-Sampson/Taylor26162452393

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 3.55 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.

3.91
Martha Brown
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.79
Angela Bleak
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.72
Kim Cronin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.71
Chandi Hurd
usually #2 Singles 43%, also #1 Singles 43% · published 4
3.69
Aurie Colligan
usually #1 Singles 38%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 4
3.66
Emily Benton
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.63
Annette Knight
published 4
3.58
Sabrena Suite-Mangum
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 4
3.55
Katie Swensen
usually #3 Doubles 63%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.48
Jessica Gardner
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.38
Michelle Maxfield
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.37
Gretel Sampson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.34
Nicole Chase
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.26
Alena Taylor
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #3 Doubles 36% · published 3.5
3.16
Manal Hall
usually #1 Singles 63%, also #2 Singles 38% · published 3.5
Lisa Stebbing
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published
Mary Kathryn Harman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Natalie Clawson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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+15.0% vs expected
Aurie Colligan + Martha Brown7267% games+10.6% vs expected
Jessica Gardner + Gretel Sampson5752% games+8.9% vs expected
Alena Taylor + Angela Bleak4255% games+8.5% vs expected
Manal Hall + Lisa Stebbing1443% games+8.1% vs expected
Alena Taylor + Michelle Maxfield7850% games+7.3% vs expected
Alena Taylor + Chandi Hurd6056% games+6.0% vs expected
Kim Cronin + Katie Swensen13362% games+5.9% 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.

Martha Brown
202W–72L career · 9 lines in 2024
<1%76%24%
3.91
4
Angela Bleak
214W–163L career · 13 lines in 2024
1%94%5%
3.79
4
Kim Cronin
380W–238L career · 14 lines in 2024
5%94%1%
3.72
4
Chandi Hurd
183W–142L career · 7 lines in 2024
6%93%1%
3.71
4
Aurie Colligan
156W–49L career · 8 lines in 2024
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Emily Benton
148W–120L career · 9 lines in 2024
11%89%<1%
3.66
4
Annette Knight
58W–66L career · no lines in 2024
15%84%<1%
3.63
4
Sabrena Suite-Mangum
82W–38L career · 2 lines in 2024
27%73%<1%
3.58
Katie Swensen
102W–84L career · 8 lines in 2024
36%64%<1%
3.55
Jessica Gardner
81W–71L career · 4 lines in 2024
56%44%<1%
3.48
Michelle Maxfield
204W–139L career · 6 lines in 2024
82%18%<1%
3.38
3.5
Gretel Sampson
200W–198L career · 8 lines in 2024
<1%85%15%
3.37
3.5
Nicole Chase
50W–36L career · 8 lines in 2024
<1%89%10%
3.34
3.5
Alena Taylor
174W–200L career · 11 lines in 2024
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Manal Hall
111W–167L career · 8 lines in 2024
11%89%<1%
3.16
Lisa Stebbing
95W–57L career · 7 lines in 2024
not enough data
Mary Kathryn Harman
36W–30L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Natalie Clawson
42W–26L career · 3 lines in 2024
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.