Teams

Sports Mall-Nelson

2026 Winter League-Weekday · 2.5W

9 players · average NTRP 2.50 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-03-09vs Tennis GalsLost 01
L#1 DoublesOlivia Moreton / Karen Weyman vs Lauren Bickmore / Melissa Jardine2-6, 2-6
2026-02-16vs Terminetters-Jackson/EvansLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaren Weyman / Olivia Moreton vs Suzanne Kingsford / Niki Evans2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-02-09vs Wasatch Hills RacquettesLost 01
L#2 DoublesKaren Weyman / Olivia Moreton vs Amy Eichner / Alessandra Huamani6-4, 3-6, 0-1
2026-02-02vs Tennis GalsLost 01
L#2 DoublesKaren Weyman / Olivia Moreton vs Gretchen Pettey / Maile Curtis2-6, 5-7
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 standings6 teams · 2.5W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Tennis Gals7118616177
2IR-Soft Serves7117718176
3SunPro-Blotter/Hoffman35111328213
4Wasatch Rec-Kelly/Nielsen35111329189
5Terminetters-Jackson/Evans35101430212
6Sports Mall-Nelson0812347280

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 2.05 estimated across 8 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.

2.40
Karen Weyman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.32
Cameron Nelson
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #4 Doubles 20% · published 2.5
2.19
Kimberly Flamm
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.00
Kiely Hanks
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 44% · published
1.96
Megan Ord
usually #2 Doubles 38%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published
1.90
Olivia Moreton
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
1.88
Jill Wade
usually #3 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published
1.78
Summer Adamson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Michelle Cannon
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 Flamm + Summer Adamson0837% games+1.6% vs expected
Summer Adamson + Kiely Hanks0534% games−0.4% vs expected
Kimberly Flamm + Kiely Hanks11832% games−1.9% vs expected
Olivia Moreton + Karen Weyman3845% games−3.4% vs expected
Megan Ord + Jill Wade01020% games−14.6% vs expected
Summer Adamson + Megan Ord044 matchesnot enough data
Olivia Moreton + Michelle Cannon033 matchesnot enough data
Summer Adamson + Jill Wade033 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.

Karen Weyman
30W–23L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%76%24%
2.40
2.5
Cameron Nelson
18W–49L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%91%9%
2.32
Kimberly Flamm
10W–44L career · 9 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.19
Kiely Hanks
7W–57L career · 9 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.00
Megan Ord
3W–28L career · 8 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.96
Olivia Moreton
84W–118L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.90
Jill Wade
1W–23L career · 9 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.88
Summer Adamson
3W–50L career · 8 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.78
Michelle Cannon
4W–6L career · no lines 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.