Teams

Red Ledges-Clark/Christensen

2022 Fall Indoor League-Weekday · 3.5W

14 players · average NTRP 3.93 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule
Flight standings15 teams · 3.5W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Red Ledges-Clark/Christensen6019513138
2Ace Athletics-Harmon6019516177
3Ogden-Love/Maxfield5116820180
4Liberty Park Tennis-Swensen/Sampson42141024196
5Sports Mall-Henderson/Knowlton4215924195
6Sunpro-Fillmore/Hansen42121228192
7Sunpro-Westover/Hall33141022166
8Park City MARC-Smith/Kern33131126187
9Salt Lake Tennis-Cracroft24101432216
10Liberty Park Tennis-Leishman/Ewing2461837228
11Liberty Park Tennis-Assemi/Handlon1591533215
12Ivory Ridge-Allen/Smith1581634223
13Sports Mall-Hall/Weaver1571737237
14Ivory Ridge-Adams/Roper1561840235
15Salt Lake Tennis-Swalberg0651939256

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 3.48 estimated across 9 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.

4.01
Deyce Peterson
usually #1 Female Doubles 40%, also #1 Female Singles 20% · published 4
3.89
Heather Probst
usually #3 Female Doubles 40%, also #1 Female Doubles 40% · published 4
3.88
Carly Reese
usually #2 Female Doubles 43%, also #1 Female Doubles 43% · published 4
Heidi Clark
published 4
3.72
Amber Greenwood
published 4
3.39
3.32
Lisa Wade
published
3.18
Lisa Olson
published
3.14
Jen Dagley
usually #1 Female Doubles 44%, also #3 Female Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.79
Marian Christensen
published
Arlene Racker
published
Melinda Romney
published
Rachel Ray
published
Veronica Miller
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.

Carly Reese + Heather Probst8167% games+11.1% vs expected
Amber Greenwood + Deyce Peterson5166% games+10.0% vs expected
Lisa Wade + Amber Greenwood16265% games+7.2% vs expected
Amber Greenwood + Heidi Clark161157% games+5.6% vs expected
Deyce Peterson + Heather Probst48764% games+5.1% vs expected
Melinda Romney + Heather Probst6258% games+4.9% vs expected
Veronica Miller + Marian Christensen7455% games+4.4% vs expected
Carly Reese + Amber Greenwood16561% games+3.5% 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.

4
Deyce Peterson
169W–42L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%45%55%
4.01
4
Heather Probst
114W–33L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%79%21%
3.89
4
Carly Reese
178W–87L career · 7 lines in 2022
<1%82%18%
3.88
4
Heidi Clark
47W–31L career · type A · no lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Amber Greenwood
154W–66L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.72
4
Cheryl A McCullough
87W–59L career · type A · no lines in 2022
79%21%<1%
3.39
Lisa Wade
91W–87L career · no lines in 2022
1%91%9%
3.32
Lisa Olson
84W–60L career · no lines in 2022
9%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Jen Dagley
79W–114L career · 9 lines in 2022
13%86%<1%
3.14
Marian Christensen
32W–74L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
2.79
Arlene Racker
20W–29L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Melinda Romney
41W–14L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Rachel Ray
60W–31L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Veronica Miller
40W–50L career · no lines in 2022
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.