Teams

Cottonwood Club-Ricker/Haverkost

2024 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 3.0W AM

20 players · average NTRP 3.14 / 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 →
Schedule5 played
2024-05-29vs Sports Mall-Wood/GeorgeWon 10
W#2 DoublesMelissa Child / Robin Asmar vs Kami Galbraith / Nancy Miller6-1, 6-0
L#2 DoublesMelissa Child / Holly Ricker vs MacY Bell / Erin Massey4-6, 7-5, 0-1
2024-05-15vs Park City MARC-Byrne/KruegerLost 02
L#2 DoublesMegan Hanrahan / Jane Woolley vs Sharon Bush / Sarah Yates3-6, 3-6
L#2 SinglesMelissa Child vs Jennifer Williams1-6, 1-6
2024-05-01Lost 01
L#3 DoublesTam Pham / Megan Hanrahan vs LISA PERMENTER / Cicily Beckstead2-6, 7-5, 0-1
2024-04-17Lost 01
L#2 DoublesHolly Ricker / Melissa Child vs Angelyn Sorenson / Jennifer Madison5-7, 1-6
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 standings for 3.0W AM have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 2.99 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.

3.40
Taylor Haverkost
usually #1 Singles 62%, also #1 Doubles 31% · published 3.5
3.40
Lori Carter
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #2 Singles 29% · published
3.25
Jane Woolley
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published
3.12
Courtney Fredrickson
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.09
Kerry Davis
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.04
Ally Lyle
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
3.01
Jamuna Nielsen
usually #1 Singles 31%, also #1 Doubles 31% · published 3.5
2.91
Amanda Krejci
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.88
Melissa Child
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3
Alison Barber
published 3
Carly Hazen
usually #2 Singles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.69
Mikelle Moore
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.63
Sara Turley
usually #1 Doubles 29%, also #1 Singles 29% · published 3
2.49
Holly Ricker
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published 3
Kelly Lund
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Magdalena Kovacsovics
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Megan Hanrahan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Paula Naatz
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Robin Asmar
usually #2 Doubles 71%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
Tam Pham
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.

Paula Naatz + Holly Ricker2348% games+12.8% vs expected
Kerry Davis + Lori Carter5260% games+12.0% vs expected
Amanda Krejci + Jane Woolley12559% games+10.4% vs expected
Alison Barber + Jamuna Nielsen5450% games+5.7% vs expected
Melissa Child + Sara Turley3256% games+4.0% vs expected
Taylor Haverkost + Lori Carter15660% games+3.6% vs expected
Jamuna Nielsen + Melissa Child3449% games+3.6% vs expected
Mikelle Moore + Melissa Child13952% games+2.5% 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
Taylor Haverkost
138W–62L career · 13 lines in 2024
<1%76%24%
3.40
Lori Carter
107W–54L career · 7 lines in 2024
<1%77%23%
3.40
Jane Woolley
77W–34L career · 11 lines in 2024
4%93%4%
3.25
3.5
Courtney Fredrickson
83W–73L career · 9 lines in 2024
19%80%<1%
3.12
Kerry Davis
35W–30L career · 4 lines in 2024
26%74%<1%
3.09
3
Ally Lyle
43W–20L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%39%61%
3.04
3.5
Jamuna Nielsen
126W–120L career · 13 lines in 2024
48%52%<1%
3.01
3
Amanda Krejci
62W–55L career · 9 lines in 2024
<1%73%27%
2.91
3
Melissa Child
73W–73L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%81%19%
2.88
3
Alison Barber
16W–23L career · type A · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Carly Hazen
11W–12L career · 5 lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Mikelle Moore
46W–52L career · 2 lines in 2024
9%90%1%
2.69
3
Sara Turley
45W–58L career · 7 lines in 2024
17%82%<1%
2.63
3
Holly Ricker
57W–151L career · type A · 10 lines in 2024
53%47%<1%
2.49
Kelly Lund
37W–37L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Magdalena Kovacsovics
50W–82L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Megan Hanrahan
16W–42L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Paula Naatz
57W–82L career · 4 lines in 2024
not enough data
Robin Asmar
25W–65L career · 7 lines in 2024
not enough data
Tam Pham
4W–3L career · no lines in 2024
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.