Teams

Sports Mall-King

2025 Fall Indoor League-Weekday · 3.0W

14 players · average NTRP 2.70 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-12-17vs Liberty Park-VolleydollsLost 12
L#1 DoublesChantel Wall / Kiely Hanks vs Liz Baucom / Erin Massey0-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesAly King / Jenni Guynn vs Megan Berceau / Stacy Higbee6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesBrooke Muir / Kelli Cannon vs Nancy Orme / Jennifer Madison0-6, 0-6
2025-12-10vs Cottonwood Club-RickerLost 04
L#1 DoublesLisa Hansen / Mckelle Chubbuck vs Sara Turley / Tam Pham2-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesAly King vs Karol Liced Sanchez Vanegas3-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesAlyssa Andrus / Megan Ord vs Amanda Krejci / Brittany Pope1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesNatalie Farley / Kimberly Duncan vs Holly Ricker / Jamie Tate0-6, 1-6
2025-11-19vs Liberty Park-VolleydollsLost 13
W#1 DoublesJenni Guynn / Lisa Hansen vs Anna Pearce / Nancy Orme4-6, 5-4, 1-0
L#1 SinglesBrielle Barton vs Rebecca Anderson2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesKimberly Duncan / Natalie Farley vs Liz Baucom / Erin Massey1-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesBrooke Muir / Alyssa Andrus vs Stacy Higbee / Niki Evans2-6, 2-6
2025-11-12vs Sports Mall-Stroud-Peterson/EckertLost 12
L#1 DoublesAlyssa Andrus / Natalie Farley vs Rebecca Rynders / Shawna Smart1-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesLisa Hansen vs Naomi Stroud-Peterson6-2, 2-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAly King / Jenni Guynn vs Brooke Urry / Jennifer Evans3-6, 5-3, 0-1
2025-11-05vs Sports Mall-Shipp/CallisterLost 12
W#1 DoublesJenni Guynn / Aly King vs Heather Callister / Lisa Packer7-6, 3-2
L#1 SinglesBrielle Barton vs Megan Moore2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesMegan Ord / Chantel Wall vs Kami Galbraith / Penny Gambill1-6, 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 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 2.34 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.

3.14
Jenni Guynn
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Alyssa Andrus
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.57
Kelli Cannon
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.57
Chantel Wall
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.42
Kimberly Duncan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.34
Natalie Farley
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.31
Brielle Barton
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 2.5
2.24
Aly King
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 2.5
2.16
Kimberly Flamm
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
2.05
Brooke Muir
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
1.99
Kiely Hanks
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
1.98
Megan Ord
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Lisa Hansen
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
Mckelle Chubbuck
usually #1 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.

Kimberly Flamm + Kiely Hanks11832% games−1.2% vs expected
Natalie Farley + Kimberly Duncan1631% games−6.8% vs expected
Aly King + Jenni Guynn5255% gamesnot enough data
Kimberly Flamm + Aly King123 matchesnot enough data
Brielle Barton + Kelli Cannon123 matchesnot enough data
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.

Jenni Guynn
19W–4L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%15%85%
3.14
3
Alyssa Andrus
1W–3L career · type S · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kelli Cannon
4W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
29%71%<1%
2.57
3
Chantel Wall
7W–10L career · type S · 2 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
2.57
Kimberly Duncan
1W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
73%27%<1%
2.42
Natalie Farley
1W–7L career · 3 lines in 2025
89%11%<1%
2.34
2.5
Brielle Barton
3W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%93%7%
2.31
2.5
Aly King
11W–27L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%98%2%
2.24
Kimberly Flamm
10W–45L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.16
2.5
Brooke Muir
1W–9L career · type S · 2 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.05
Kiely Hanks
7W–58L career · 6 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
1.99
Megan Ord
3W–28L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
1.98
Lisa Hansen
18W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mckelle Chubbuck
1W–1L career · 1 line 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.