Teams

Ivory Ridge-Widtfeldt/Burdge

2021 USTA Adult 40 & Over · 3.5W AM

16 players · average NTRP 3.56 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
2021-08-10Lost 02
L#1 DoublesJennifer Stringham / Suzanne Burdge vs Andrea Burns / DeeAnn Edwards4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesCecia Croft / Heather Cottrell vs Michelle Fowkes / Paola Lara1-6, 0-6
2021-08-03vs Salt Lake Tennis-LarkinMoretensenWon 10
W#2 DoublesSherston Faux / Jennifer Stringham vs Marilee Cracroft / Nancy Sparrer6-0, 6-2
2021-07-27vs Park City MARC-Leigh/EpsteinLost 01
L#2 DoublesSuzanne Burdge / Kristi Parker vs Deborah Leigh / Kim Persky5-7, 6-2, 0-1
2021-07-20Lost 01
L#1 DoublesShaunee Adams / Jennifer Stringham vs Sarah Love / Mindy Dunyon3-6, 4-6
2021-07-13Won 10
W#3 DoublesChristine Adams / Sara Madsen vs Natalie Sharp / Debra Knowlton6-4, 7-5
2021-06-29vs Spanish Fork-Westover/BarberWon 20
W#1 DoublesJennifer Stringham / Kristi Parker vs Lynette Komiya / Raquel Westover6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesHeather Cottrell / Beverly Robison vs Jill McEwen / Marilyn Patch6-0, 6-3
2021-06-22Lost 01
L#3 DoublesHeather Cottrell / Jennifer Wells vs Linda Pack / Whitney Fautin3-6, 2-6
2021-06-15vs Skyridge HS - Fowkes/BurnsWon 10
W#3 DoublesSara Madsen / Kristi Parker vs Ashley Bailey / Jennifer Napierski6-4, 2-6, 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 standings4 teams · 3.5W AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Skyridge HS - Fowkes/Burns8023926243
2Ivory Ridge-Widtfeldt/Burdge44171535280
3Salt Lake Tennis-LarkinMoretensen44141842299
4South Jordan-Bennett/Finlay35131942317

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 3.27 estimated across 15 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
Angela Bleak
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.74
Kim Santiago
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.57
Suzanne Burdge
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published
3.56
Lindsey Ramage
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.34
Jennifer Stringham
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.33
Cecia Croft
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.27
Sara Madsen
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
3.23
Kristi Parker
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.13
Lisa Willes
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.10
Lori Curtis
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.09
Heather Cottrell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.05
Mindy Christensen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.05
Jennifer Wells
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.99
Sherston Faux
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.86
Christine Adams
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Shaunee Adams
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Lindsey Ramage + Kim Santiago25859% games+9.6% vs expected
Jennifer Wells + Angela Bleak6156% games+6.4% vs expected
Suzanne Burdge + Lori Curtis251554% games+1.9% vs expected
Jennifer Stringham + Kristi Parker523453% games+1.1% vs expected
Heather Cottrell + Mindy Christensen6553% games+0.6% vs expected
Jennifer Wells + Cecia Croft9851% games+0.4% vs expected
Heather Cottrell + Sara Madsen91246% games−1.8% vs expected
Christine Adams + Cecia Croft41346% games−2.9% 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
Angela Bleak
214W–163L career · 6 lines in 2021
1%94%5%
3.79
4
Kim Santiago
151W–88L career · 8 lines in 2021
3%94%2%
3.74
Suzanne Burdge
89W–81L career · 10 lines in 2021
29%71%<1%
3.57
3.5
Lindsey Ramage
186W–128L career · 8 lines in 2021
<1%31%69%
3.56
3.5
Jennifer Stringham
124W–120L career · 4 lines in 2021
<1%88%11%
3.34
3.5
Cecia Croft
97W–109L career · 6 lines in 2021
1%90%9%
3.33
Sara Madsen
84W–72L career · 6 lines in 2021
2%94%4%
3.27
Kristi Parker
97W–110L career · 3 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.23
Lisa Willes
58W–102L career · 4 lines in 2021
15%85%<1%
3.13
Lori Curtis
85W–110L career · 8 lines in 2021
23%77%<1%
3.10
3.5
Heather Cottrell
86W–114L career · 3 lines in 2021
24%76%<1%
3.09
Mindy Christensen
93W–100L career · 3 lines in 2021
35%65%<1%
3.05
Jennifer Wells
64W–109L career · 2 lines in 2021
36%64%<1%
3.05
3.5
Sherston Faux
88W–157L career · 6 lines in 2021
54%46%<1%
2.99
3
Christine Adams
47W–73L career · 1 line in 2021
<1%86%13%
2.86
Shaunee Adams
1W–0L career · 1 line in 2021
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.