Teams

Cottonwood Club-Eischeid

2025 USTA Adult 40 & Over · 4.5W PM

20 players · average NTRP 4.46 / 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 →
Schedule4 played
2025-08-02Won 10
W#3 DoublesLindsay Knight / Heather Foy vs Christy Owens / Massae Sato MacIunas7-5, 6-4
2025-07-03vs Sports Mall-Marz/SmithLost 01
L#3 DoublesJennifer Korb / Lindsay Knight vs Debra Rawlings / Julie DeLong3-6, 3-6
2025-07-01vs Liberty Park-Woodbury/MillerLost 01
L#3 DoublesJaNae Smith / Maribel Alvarez vs Pamela Hofmann / Paige Miller2-6, 1-6
2025-06-26Split 11
L#1 SinglesMaribel Alvarez vs Kecia Dallin6-7, 1-6
W#3 DoublesChristina Mooney / Lindsay Knight vs Julie Cooley / Amy Hansen5-7, 6-2, 1-0
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 · 4.5W PM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Sports Mall-Marz/Smith62221027266
2Liberty Park-Woodbury/Miller62161638282
3Cottonwood Club-Eischeid44181432272
4Liberty Park-Wallace/Kemp35122046334
5Liberty Park-Sterbenz/Bernard17122048335

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 4.17 estimated across 17 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.

4.49
Brook Vietor
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
4.43
Kimberly Simpson
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published
4.35
Stephanie Tonin
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 4.5
4.31
Whitney Fautin
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4.5
Christina Mooney
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.25
Christina Eischeid
published 4.5
4.23
Marci Seegmiller
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Singles 29% · published 4.5
4.21
Rosa McGuire
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4.5
4.20
Jessica Schulz
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
4.20
Maribel Alvarez
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
4.17
Arashan Heikkila
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 4.5
4.15
Susan Picou
usually #2 Doubles 38%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.12
Heidi Gordon
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
4.09
Meghan Clark
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.07
Wendy Widerburg
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
4.02
Heather Foy
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
3.83
Lindsay Knight
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.75
JaNae Smith
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
Jennifer Korb
published
Lisa Caldwell
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.

Arashan Heikkila + Brook Vietor6071% games+13.2% vs expected
Kimberly Simpson + Brook Vietor12070% games+8.6% vs expected
Susan Picou + Brook Vietor9262% games+7.8% vs expected
Kimberly Simpson + Christina Eischeid11263% games+7.8% vs expected
Stephanie Tonin + Brook Vietor8267% games+7.3% vs expected
Stephanie Tonin + Kimberly Simpson19960% games+7.1% vs expected
Brook Vietor + Heidi Gordon14159% games+6.1% vs expected
Meghan Clark + Marci Seegmiller6162% 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.

4.5
Brook Vietor
150W–45L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%53%47%
4.49
Kimberly Simpson
144W–57L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
4.43
4.5
Stephanie Tonin
159W–95L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%88%12%
4.35
4.5
Whitney Fautin
191W–44L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
4.31
4.5
Christina Mooney
60W–46L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
4.5
Christina Eischeid
124W–57L career · no lines in 2025
3%95%2%
4.25
4.5
Marci Seegmiller
93W–55L career · 7 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
4.23
4.5
Rosa McGuire
155W–42L career · 5 lines in 2025
5%94%1%
4.21
Jessica Schulz
126W–50L career · 6 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
4.20
Maribel Alvarez
29W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
4.20
4.5
Arashan Heikkila
188W–76L career · 8 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
4.17
4.5
Susan Picou
178W–77L career · 8 lines in 2025
13%87%<1%
4.15
4.5
Heidi Gordon
105W–100L career · 7 lines in 2025
18%82%<1%
4.12
Meghan Clark
57W–55L career · 4 lines in 2025
25%75%<1%
4.09
4.5
Wendy Widerburg
111W–83L career · 7 lines in 2025
29%71%<1%
4.07
4.5
Heather Foy
59W–82L career · 4 lines in 2025
44%55%<1%
4.02
Lindsay Knight
110W–44L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%89%10%
3.83
4
JaNae Smith
221W–188L career · 6 lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.75
Jennifer Korb
31W–32L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Lisa Caldwell
11W–11L 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.