Teams

Cottonwood Club-Kovacsovics/Haverkost

2023 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 3.0W PM

19 players · average NTRP 3.19 / 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
2023-06-05vs Sports Mall-Peterson/FarrSplit 11
W#2 DoublesStephanie Gelman / Nicole Fisher vs Jamie Crews / Tori Locke6-1, 6-3
L#3 DoublesHolly Ricker / Robin Asmar vs Naomi Stroud-Peterson / Shawna Smart4-6, 6-2, 0-1
2023-06-03vs South Jordan-RoseLost 01
L#1 SinglesLindsay Duckworth vs Emily Burgess2-6, 2-6
2023-05-22vs Sunpro-GouffLost 01
L#3 DoublesLindsay Duckworth / Kerry Davis vs Melissa Reoch / Jennifer Hoffman1-6, 6-3, 0-1
2023-05-15vs Salt Lake Tennis-BickmoreSplit 11
L#1 DoublesJamie Rossi / Melissa Barnett vs Betsy Ostrander / Nicole Leatham3-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesNicole Fisher / Stephanie Gelman vs Mari Bickmore / Karla Block7-5, 6-3
2023-05-11Won 10
W#3 DoublesNicole Fisher / Stephanie Gelman vs Kami Galbraith / Heather George7-6, 6-3
2023-04-22Lost 01
L#1 DoublesNicole Fisher / Melissa Barnett vs Diane Poole / Jennifer Tooley2-6, 0-6
2023-04-17Split 11
L#1 DoublesKerry Davis / Lindsay Duckworth vs Kelly Wilcox / Tori Locke6-4, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesRobin Asmar / Shelly Logue vs Naomi Stroud-Peterson / Shawna Smart6-4, 6-4
2023-04-10vs South Jordan-RoseLost 01
L#2 DoublesMelissa Barnett / Jamie Rossi vs Katie Rose / Carrie Larsen3-6, 3-6
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 PM 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 2.96 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.

3.40
Taylor Haverkost
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #2 Singles 29% · published 3.5
3.40
Lori Carter
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 20% · published
3.30
Haley H Moreno
usually #1 Singles 44%, also #2 Singles 22% · published
3.17
Lindsay Duckworth
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.14
Lindy Parks
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.09
Kerry Davis
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.88
Melissa Child
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 3
2.77
Krissie Summerhays
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 14% · published 3
Alison Parsons
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3
Jane Chandramouli
usually #2 Doubles 36%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published 3
2.53
Jamie Rossi
published
2.49
Holly Ricker
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.42
Stephanie Gelman
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Kelly Lund
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
Magdalena Kovacsovics
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Melissa Barnett
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Nicole Fisher
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 13% · published
Robin Asmar
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Shelly Logue
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.

Kerry Davis + Lindsay Duckworth2454% games+13.8% vs expected
Magdalena Kovacsovics + Nicole Fisher5163% games+12.9% vs expected
Kerry Davis + Lori Carter5260% games+12.0% vs expected
Melissa Child + Haley H Moreno7066% games+11.5% vs expected
Lori Carter + Haley H Moreno11162% games+7.5% vs expected
Taylor Haverkost + Lori Carter15660% games+3.6% vs expected
Kelly Lund + Lindy Parks282155% games+0.8% vs expected
Jane Chandramouli + Magdalena Kovacsovics5947% games+0.6% 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 · 7 lines in 2023
<1%76%24%
3.40
Lori Carter
107W–54L career · 10 lines in 2023
<1%77%23%
3.40
Haley H Moreno
82W–46L career · 9 lines in 2023
2%91%8%
3.30
3.5
Lindsay Duckworth
43W–46L career · 3 lines in 2023
12%87%1%
3.17
3.5
Lindy Parks
120W–90L career · 5 lines in 2023
15%84%1%
3.14
Kerry Davis
35W–30L career · 2 lines in 2023
26%74%<1%
3.09
3
Melissa Child
73W–73L career · 6 lines in 2023
<1%81%19%
2.88
3
Krissie Summerhays
109W–122L career · 6 lines in 2023
3%92%5%
2.77
3
Alison Parsons
20W–23L career · 6 lines in 2023
not enough data
3
Jane Chandramouli
60W–125L career · 11 lines in 2023
not enough data
Jamie Rossi
7W–27L career · no lines in 2023
41%59%<1%
2.53
3
Holly Ricker
57W–151L career · type A · 6 lines in 2023
53%47%<1%
2.49
Stephanie Gelman
31W–58L career · 3 lines in 2023
71%29%<1%
2.42
Kelly Lund
37W–37L career · 5 lines in 2023
not enough data
Magdalena Kovacsovics
50W–82L career · 6 lines in 2023
not enough data
Melissa Barnett
8W–14L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
Nicole Fisher
100W–62L career · 8 lines in 2023
not enough data
Robin Asmar
25W–65L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Shelly Logue
11W–5L career · no lines in 2023
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.