Teams

Cottonwood Club-Barber

2024 UTA 2.5 Summer League · 2.5 AM

8 players · average NTRP 3.12 / 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 →
Schedule9 played
2024-08-05vs Sports Mall-NelsonWon 30
W#1 DoublesTam Pham / Jane Woolley vs Megan Moore / Lindsey Pizza1-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#1 SinglesAmanda Krejci vs Cameron Nelson6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesAlison Barber / Mary Diaz Gordon vs Lindsay Roth / Kimberly Flamm6-1, 6-4
2024-07-29vs Wasatch Hills-Iverson/DoolinWon 30
W#1 DoublesJamie Tate / Tam Pham vs Nicholl Doolin / Jane Moore6-2, 6-2
W#1 SinglesSara Turley vs Brooke Iverson6-2, 7-5
W#2 DoublesAlison Barber / Jane Woolley vs Tiffany VandenAkker / Jennifer Olson6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2024-07-22vs Wasatch Rec Center-KellyLost 01
L#1 DoublesTam Pham / Sara Turley vs Michelle Nielsen / Chelsea Watts5-7, 4-6
2024-07-15vs Salt Lake Tennis-WilliamsWon 21
W#1 DoublesAlison Barber / Mary Diaz Gordon vs Staci Dansie / Sarah McMillan6-1, 6-1
W#1 SinglesTam Pham vs Annie Mortensen7-6, 7-5
L#2 DoublesAmanda Krejci / Kylee Bryson vs Kristin Midyett / Rebecca Myers3-6, 6-4, 0-1
2024-07-08vs Sunpro-Dunn/CookLost 03
L#1 DoublesAlison Barber / Tam Pham vs Jennifer Hoffman / MaryBeth Robertson1-6, 0-6
L#1 SinglesAmanda Krejci vs SalleeAnn Miller1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesMary Diaz Gordon / Megan Hanrahan vs Rachelle Lee / Debbie Dunn3-6, 6-7
2024-07-01vs Park City MARC-Jacobs/JordanWon 21
L#1 DoublesTam Pham / Kylee Bryson vs Lynette Maloney / Stacey Christrensen6-3, 1-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesAmanda Krejci vs Bethany Jordan6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAlison Barber / Sara Turley vs Shruthi Kinkead / Jenny Adams7-6, 6-2
2024-06-24vs Park City MARC-Llewellyn/WhiteWon 21
W#1 DoublesAmanda Krejci / Sara Turley vs Bridget Llewellyn / Rachel Sahlman7-6, 6-1
W#1 SinglesJane Woolley vs Jennifer Robert6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesMary Diaz Gordon / Kylee Bryson vs Kim Li / Margaret Bloomer1-6, 4-6
2024-06-17vs Ivory Ridge-MullinsWon 21
W#1 DoublesTam Pham / Mary Diaz Gordon vs Risa Karras / Travis Treat6-0, 6-1
W#1 SinglesJane Woolley vs Shea McGee6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesAlison Barber / Kylee Bryson vs Megan Mullins / Paulette Santiago3-6, 3-6
2024-06-10vs Red Ledges-EganWon 30
W#1 DoublesAmanda Krejci / Kylee Bryson vs McCall Weekes / Susan Anderson6-0, 6-0
W#1 SinglesMary Diaz Gordon vs Michelle Stauffer6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesAlison Barber / Jane Woolley vs Michelle van Tassell / Jennifer Christ6-1, 6-1
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 standings10 teams · 2.5 AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Sunpro-Dunn/Cook9023410151
2Cottonwood Club-Barber8119818183
3Salt Lake Tennis-Friedli54121533242
4Park City MARC-Llewellyn/White54131434270
5Wasatch Rec Center-Kelly45141326203
6Ivory Ridge-Mullins45131432244
7Wasatch Hills-Iverson/Doolin45101734239
8Park City MARC-Jacobs/Jordan36121533232
9Sports Mall-Nelson36111633223
10Red Ledges-Egan0981943283

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 2.87 estimated across 5 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.

3.25
Jane Woolley
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 40% · published
3.24
Mary Diaz Gordon
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.91
Amanda Krejci
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
Alison Barber
usually #2 Doubles 71%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.63
Sara Turley
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.34
Kylee Bryson
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
Megan Hanrahan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Tam Pham
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #1 Singles 14% · 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.

Alison Barber + Mary Diaz Gordon3354% games+12.2% vs expected
Amanda Krejci + Jane Woolley12559% games+10.4% vs expected
Mary Diaz Gordon + Jane Woolley6260% games+6.2% vs expected
Sara Turley + Amanda Krejci5848% games+1.0% vs expected
Mary Diaz Gordon + Sara Turley3256% gamesnot enough data
Megan Hanrahan + Alison Barber033 matchesnot enough data
Kylee Bryson + Sara Turley033 matchesnot enough data
Kylee Bryson + Amanda Krejci213 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.

Jane Woolley
77W–34L career · 5 lines in 2024
4%93%4%
3.25
3.5
Mary Diaz Gordon
108W–65L career · 6 lines in 2024
4%93%3%
3.24
3
Amanda Krejci
62W–55L career · 6 lines in 2024
<1%73%27%
2.91
3
Alison Barber
16W–23L career · type A · 7 lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Sara Turley
45W–58L career · 4 lines in 2024
17%82%<1%
2.63
Kylee Bryson
21W–37L career · 5 lines in 2024
88%12%<1%
2.34
Megan Hanrahan
16W–42L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Tam Pham
4W–3L career · 7 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.