Teams

Cottonwood Club-Barber/Ricker

2026 Fall Outdoor League-Saturday · 3.0W

11 players · average NTRP 2.88 / 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 →
Flight standings11 teams · 3.0W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Park City Mid Court Crises000000
2Liberty Park-Kesler000000
3SunPro Queen Bees000000
4Cottonwood Club-Barber/Ricker000000
5Wasatch Hills-Volley Llamas000000
6SL Tennis - Bayna/Bickmore000000
7SM- Tennisaurus-DeLong000000
8Court Smashers000000
9TAOU-Tanner/Coleman000000
10SL Tennis-Vogel/Pierce000000
11IR- Saturday Strikers000000

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 2.46 estimated across 10 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.

Alison Barber
published 3
2.63
Angela Jensen
published 3
2.60
2.58
Emily Roeder
published 3
2.58
Sara Turley
published 3
2.50
Lisa Harrison
published
2.50
Holly Ricker
published 3
2.48
Kristin Bretz
published
2.32
Kylee Bryson
published
2.24
Crystal Connors
published 2.5
2.18
Kristin Rocke
published 2.5
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.

Holly Ricker + Sara Turley1634% games−3.6% vs expected
Kristin Bretz + Crystal Connors3255% gamesnot enough data
Kristin Rocke + Lisa Harrison134 matchesnot enough data
Kylee Bryson + Sara Turley033 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.

3
Alison Barber
4W–8L career · type A · no lines in 2026
not enough data
3
Angela Jensen
98W–97L career · no lines in 2026
15%85%<1%
2.63
3
Kristina Maljovec
17W–16L career · no lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
2.60
3
Emily Roeder
6W–12L career · no lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
2.58
3
Sara Turley
45W–60L career · no lines in 2026
28%72%<1%
2.58
Lisa Harrison
9W–20L career · no lines in 2026
0%48%52%
2.50
3
Holly Ricker
58W–151L career · type A · no lines in 2026
49%51%<1%
2.50
Kristin Bretz
18W–11L career · no lines in 2026
0%55%45%
2.48
Kylee Bryson
22W–37L career · no lines in 2026
92%8%<1%
2.32
2.5
Crystal Connors
16W–22L career · no lines in 2026
0%98%2%
2.24
2.5
Kristin Rocke
22W–44L career · no lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.18

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.