Teams

Sports Mall-Shipp/Callister

2025 Fall Indoor League-Weekday · 3.0W

15 players · average NTRP 2.94 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
L#1 DoublesCami Shipp / Lisa Packer vs Shawna Smart / Jamie Harris6-7, 0-4
W#1 SinglesHolly Goulding vs Jennifer Sweat6-1, 4-2
W#3 DoublesNancy Miller / Hallie Russell vs Rebecca Rynders / Carrie Larsen6-4, 6-5
2025-12-10vs Liberty Park-VolleydollsLost 12
L#1 SinglesPenny Gambill vs Niki Evans2-6, 2-4
W#2 DoublesSarah Gardner / Holly Goulding vs Kassie Belcher / Anna Pearce6-2, 6-2
L#3 DoublesHolli Allred / Jill Raemisch vs MacY Bell / Erin Massey4-6, 1-6
2025-12-05vs Sports Mall-Stroud-Peterson/EckertLost 13
L#1 DoublesHeather Callister / Sarah Gardner vs Naomi Stroud-Peterson / Annie Mortensen6-7, 3-0, 0-1
W#1 SinglesPenny Gambill vs Shawna Smart6-4, 2-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCami Shipp / Lindsey Pizza vs Jennifer Sweat / Jamie Harris5-7, 0-3
L#3 DoublesKami Galbraith / Nancy Miller vs Rebecca Rynders / Porsche Gardner3-6, 2-6
2025-11-12vs Cottonwood Club-RickerLost 03
L#1 DoublesCami Shipp / Heather Callister vs Tam Pham / Karol Liced Sanchez Vanegas2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesPenny Gambill / Cameron Nelson vs Holly Ricker / Liesl Lambert3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesHolli Allred / Hallie Russell vs Jamie Tate / Kylee Bryson7-5, 2-5, 1-0
2025-11-05vs Sports Mall-KingWon 21
L#1 DoublesHeather Callister / Lisa Packer vs Jenni Guynn / Aly King6-7, 2-3
W#2 DoublesJill Raemisch / Lindsey Pizza vs Kimberly Flamm / Kiely Hanks6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesKami Galbraith / Penny Gambill vs Megan Ord / Chantel Wall6-1, 6-2
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 standings18 teams · 3.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Park City MARC-Krueger/Schlachter5116818158
2Ivory Ridge-Wily5117719170
3Sports Mall-Stroud-Peterson/Eckert51141025188
4ACE Academy-Swalberg/Harman4114613121
5Cottonwood Club-Ricker4115514120
6Wasatch Hills -“Ball”erinas4113715134
7Sunpro-Simply Smashing42141022177
8Wasatch Rec-Ritchie42121227199
9Liberty Park-Volleydolls3291123158
10SunPro-Lucky Shots3316821189
11Red Ledges-Archibald33141030211
12SL Tennis-Bickmore/Kuncewitch2391127190
13Eagleridge Ladies-Dato/Nelson2481634236
14Sports Mall-Shipp/Callister1481225168
15Ogden-Cox/Olsen1471330179
16Sports Mall-King0541634222
17PC Flying Squirrels-Sahlman/Llewellyn0661835216
18SunPro-Love All Win All0612347278

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 2.64 estimated across 11 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.

3.01
Holly Goulding
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3
2.85
Melanie Olsen
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.74
Cami Shipp
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.67
Heather Callister
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.66
Lindsey Pizza
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.64
Jill Raemisch
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.63
Penny Gambill
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.60
Hallie Russell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.54
Holli Allred
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.38
Kami Galbraith
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.32
Cameron Nelson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
Lisa Packer
published
Megan Moore
published
Nancy Miller
published
Sarah Gardner
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.

Melanie Olsen + Holly Goulding8070% games+16.0% vs expected
Jill Raemisch + Melanie Olsen5163% games+14.0% vs expected
Cami Shipp + Holly Goulding6256% games+3.9% vs expected
Cami Shipp + Melanie Olsen4249% games+3.5% vs expected
Lindsey Pizza + Cami Shipp4252% games+2.8% vs expected
Heather Callister + Melanie Olsen4850% games+2.5% vs expected
Holli Allred + Hallie Russell8751% games+2.4% vs expected
Jill Raemisch + Heather Callister6548% games+0.7% 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
Holly Goulding
50W–27L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%47%53%
3.01
Melanie Olsen
62W–65L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%87%12%
2.85
3
Cami Shipp
52W–43L career · 3 lines in 2025
3%94%2%
2.74
3
Heather Callister
46W–59L career · 3 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
2.67
3
Lindsey Pizza
38W–53L career · 4 lines in 2025
11%88%<1%
2.66
3
Jill Raemisch
48W–48L career · 2 lines in 2025
15%85%<1%
2.64
3
Penny Gambill
53W–138L career · 4 lines in 2025
15%85%<1%
2.63
3
Hallie Russell
35W–46L career · 2 lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
2.60
3
Holli Allred
49W–70L career · 2 lines in 2025
39%61%<1%
2.54
Kami Galbraith
36W–60L career · 2 lines in 2025
82%18%<1%
2.38
2.5
Cameron Nelson
19W–49L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%92%8%
2.32
Lisa Packer
38W–49L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Megan Moore
0W–5L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Nancy Miller
23W–85L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Sarah Gardner
10W–36L 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.