Teams

Ogden-Andersen

2025 Fall Indoor League-Weekday · 3.5W

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-12-16vs Ace Athletics-HarmonWon 31
L#1 DoublesMary Snow / Lori Wilson vs Lindsey Williams / Shelley Petersen4-6, 0-6
W#1 SinglesMegan Schey vs Rebecca Harman7-5, 6-0
W#2 DoublesJamie Tate / Carrie Johnson vs Mary HENSLEY / Camillia Groberg7-6, 3-1
W#3 DoublesIsabel Cristina Lau / Sally Anderson vs Angelyn Sorenson / KayeLynn BASTIAN6-4, 4-2
2025-12-09vs Liberty Park-Creamer/MaxfieldLost 01
L#3 DoublesNatalie Stobbe / Mary Snow vs Mindy Christensen / Allison Kendell5-7, 3-6
2025-12-02vs Sports Mall-Lake/KnowltonLost 01
L#2 DoublesMegan Schey / Jamie Tate vs Claudine Finlay / Britany Egan2-6, 4-5
2025-11-18vs SL Tennis SpinnersWon 20
W#2 DoublesBrooke Curtis / Joy Peterson vs Maureen Russo / Mary Vander Straten7-5, 6-2
W#3 DoublesLindsay Andersen / Isabel Cristina Lau vs Marilee Cracroft / Gwyn Mcneal7-5, 5-3
2025-11-11vs Sports Mall-Farr/GreenWon 10
W#2 DoublesBrooke Curtis / Natalie Stobbe vs Lexi Farr / Tori Locke6-4, 6-3
2025-11-04vs Pumpkin Smashers-Leishman/EwingWon 30
W#1 DoublesBrooke Curtis / Emily Hales vs Lisa Ewing / Ann Trentman4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesLindsay Andersen / Megan Schey vs Hannah Lee / Shelly Kemp6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesLori Wilson / Mary Snow vs Lesley Scruggs / Jennifer Tooley6-3, 5-3
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 3.15 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.

3.44
Jacki Joseph
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published 3.5
3.40
Lindsay Andersen
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.33
Megan Schey
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.32
Brooke Curtis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.29
Emily Hales
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.27
Natalie Stobbe
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.23
Carrie Johnson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.07
Mary Snow
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.06
Betty Yamashita
published 3.5
2.91
Lori Wilson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.81
Joy Peterson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.68
Isabel Cristina Lau
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Sally Anderson
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.

Brooke Curtis + Mary Snow4162% games+16.9% vs expected
Jacki Joseph + Joy Peterson6261% games+10.3% vs expected
Natalie Stobbe + Brooke Curtis7359% games+7.0% vs expected
Brooke Curtis + Lindsay Andersen26660% games+6.5% vs expected
Jacki Joseph + Lindsay Andersen13559% games+4.9% vs expected
Jacki Joseph + Brooke Curtis11754% games+4.8% vs expected
Isabel Cristina Lau + Brooke Curtis5255% games+4.2% vs expected
Jacki Joseph + Mary Snow6158% games+3.6% 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.

3.5
Jacki Joseph
223W–156L career · 10 lines in 2025
<1%67%33%
3.44
Lindsay Andersen
117W–67L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%76%24%
3.40
3.5
Megan Schey
130W–131L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Brooke Curtis
148W–93L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.32
Emily Hales
90W–58L career · 5 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
3.29
3.5
Natalie Stobbe
87W–74L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%92%5%
3.27
3.5
Carrie Johnson
37W–40L career · 1 line in 2025
5%92%3%
3.23
Mary Snow
37W–35L career · 2 lines in 2025
30%70%<1%
3.07
3.5
Betty Yamashita
28W–30L career · no lines in 2025
34%65%<1%
3.06
Lori Wilson
70W–154L career · 2 lines in 2025
74%26%<1%
2.91
Joy Peterson
92W–82L career · 1 line in 2025
92%8%<1%
2.81
Isabel Cristina Lau
49W–93L career · 2 lines in 2025
10%89%1%
2.68
Sally Anderson
9W–3L 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.