Teams

Sports Mall-Wood

2025 Fall Indoor League-Weekday · 3.5W

14 players · average NTRP 3.40 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-12-16vs Sports Mall-Farr/GreenLost 03
L#1 SinglesLindsay Duckworth vs Kristy Olsen5-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCatherine van Uitert / Heather George vs Brenda Green / Kate Stalsberg1-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesNaomi Stroud-Peterson / Rachel Stohlton vs Lexi Farr / Tori Locke1-6, 3-6
2025-12-09vs Sports Mall-Lake/KnowltonWon 10
W#2 DoublesRachel Stohlton / Lindsay Duckworth vs Susan Knight / Yoko Walljasper6-2, 2-6, 1-0
2025-12-02vs SL Tennis SpinnersSplit 22
W#1 DoublesMegan Bewsey / Courtney Bedke vs Carla Stoddard / Mary Vander Straten6-1, 6-2
L#1 SinglesChelsea Wood vs Elizabeth Michie1-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesCatherine van Uitert / Meghan Maughan vs Elizabeth Harris-Johnson / Julie Carlston6-4, 4-2
L#3 DoublesLindsey Pizza / Rachel Stohlton vs Maureen Russo / Mary Harrison4-6, 4-2, 0-1
2025-11-18vs Pumpkin Smashers-Leishman/EwingSplit 22
W#1 DoublesMegan Bewsey / Meghan Maughan vs Allison Leishman / Lisa Ewing6-3, 7-5
W#1 SinglesCourtney Bedke vs Megan Leonard6-2, 5-2
L#2 DoublesMiche Ferrin / Naomi Stroud-Peterson vs Lesley Scruggs / Jennifer Tooley3-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesMarni Larsen / Lindsey Pizza vs Jennifer Kawakami / Porsche Gardner1-6, 1-6
2025-11-11vs Liberty Park-Creamer/MaxfieldSplit 11
W#1 DoublesCourtney Bedke / Sarah Nelson vs Bessy Nielson / Alena Taylor7-5, 6-0
L#2 DoublesLindsay Duckworth / Catherine van Uitert vs Heather Hayes / Gretel Sampson6-1, 4-6, 0-1
2025-11-04vs Ace Athletics-HarmonSplit 11
W#1 DoublesMeghan Maughan / Catherine van Uitert vs Rebecca Harman / Lindsey Williams6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesChelsea Wood / Rachel Stohlton vs Kyra Dunshee / Glenna Frey3-6, 2-6
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 standings16 teams · 3.5W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Sunpro Parker/Stringham6020414157
2Ogden-Andersen5115919182
3SunPro-Barber/Curtis5116819165
4Sports Mall-Lake/Knowlton5117720180
5Sports Mall-Farr/Green4217718178
6Ivory Ridge-Adams/Riley4215921187
7Liberty Park-Creamer/Maxfield4216824195
8Wasatch Rec Center-Wade/Stone33131126198
9Team Lowell33101430207
10Pumpkin Smashers-Leishman/Ewing3391533212
11Ivory Ridge-Hardin/Elison2481636229
12Sports Mall-Wood1571735230
13SunPro-Thorpe/Chamberlain1581636234
14SL Tennis Spinners1581636234
15Ace Athletics-Harmon1542040238
16Heber Valley-Wood/Overton0661839247

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 3.10 estimated across 12 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.

3.79
Courtney Bedke
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.56
Megan Bewsey
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.55
Meghan Maughan
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.40
Catherine van Uitert
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.19
Lindsay Duckworth
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.11
Miche Ferrin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.88
Chelsea Wood
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.85
Melanie Olsen
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.79
Naomi Stroud-Peterson
usually #3 Doubles 29%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.77
Marni Larsen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Heather George
published 3
2.66
Lindsey Pizza
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.59
Rachel Stohlton
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Lisa Packer
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.

Lindsay Duckworth + Meghan Maughan7069% games+25.8% vs expected
Lindsay Duckworth + Lindsey Pizza4453% games+9.0% vs expected
Courtney Bedke + Meghan Maughan7065% games+7.2% vs expected
Lindsey Pizza + Rachel Stohlton4943% games+7.1% vs expected
Courtney Bedke + Megan Bewsey19962% games+5.8% vs expected
Marni Larsen + Melanie Olsen1735% games−0.6% vs expected
Chelsea Wood + Miche Ferrin21140% games−0.9% vs expected
Miche Ferrin + Meghan Maughan3256% games−2.0% 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
Courtney Bedke
85W–39L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%93%5%
3.79
4
Megan Bewsey
37W–19L career · type A · 2 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.56
4
Meghan Maughan
33W–11L career · 3 lines in 2025
34%66%<1%
3.55
3.5
Catherine van Uitert
50W–45L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Lindsay Duckworth
43W–46L career · 3 lines in 2025
8%92%1%
3.19
Miche Ferrin
15W–31L career · 1 line in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.11
3
Chelsea Wood
63W–113L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
2.88
Melanie Olsen
62W–65L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%87%12%
2.85
3
Naomi Stroud-Peterson
139W–157L career · 7 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
2.79
Marni Larsen
2W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
96%4%<1%
2.77
3
Heather George
16W–37L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
3
Lindsey Pizza
38W–53L career · 4 lines in 2025
11%88%<1%
2.66
3
Rachel Stohlton
16W–57L career · 4 lines in 2025
25%75%<1%
2.59
Lisa Packer
38W–49L career · no lines in 2025
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.