Teams

Cottonwood Club-Somerville/Summerhays

2021 Fall Outdoor League-Saturday · 2.5W

7 players · average NTRP 3.00 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2021-10-22vs South Jordan-CallisterWon 20
W#1 DoublesHolly Ricker / Melissa Child vs Kristi Callister / Monica Walter6-3, 6-0
W#2 DoublesShelly Logue / Jessica Somerville vs Amelia Ence / Melanie Knaphus6-0, 6-1
2021-10-21vs Salt Lake Tennis-DelongLost 01
L#2 DoublesKristin Rocke / Elisabeth McOmber vs Chantel Vu / Ashley Wright2-6, 6-7
2021-09-25vs CMTA @ Liberty Park-Moreton/VallesLost 01
L#1 DoublesAdrienne Wiseman / Kristin Rocke vs Shelly Kaihatu / Joy Miya6-4, 4-6, 0-1
2021-08-28vs South Jordan-CallisterWon 10
W#2 DoublesKristin Rocke / Christine Mason vs Melanie Knaphus / Stephanie Burnside6-7, 6-2, 1-0
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 standings3 teams · 2.5W
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Salt Lake Tennis-Delong4212614123
2CMTA @ Liberty Park-Moreton/Valles3371126183
3Cottonwood Club-Somerville/Summerhays2461225165

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 2.68 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.

3.12
Lindy Parks
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
2.84
Melissa Child
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.77
Krissie Summerhays
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.50
Holly Ricker
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.18
Kristin Rocke
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
Kelly Lund
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Shelly Logue
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Krissie Summerhays + Shelly Logue8352% games+4.0% vs expected
Kelly Lund + Lindy Parks312354% games+2.1% vs expected
Lindy Parks + Krissie Summerhays111949% games+0.3% vs expected
Holly Ricker + Melissa Child3749% games−6.5% vs expected
Holly Ricker + Krissie Summerhays0737% games−7.1% vs expected
Holly Ricker + Lindy Parks134 matchesnot enough data
Lindy Parks + Shelly Logue404 matchesnot enough data
Krissie Summerhays + Melissa Child044 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.

3.5
Lindy Parks
121W–91L career · 5 lines in 2021
17%83%<1%
3.12
3
Melissa Child
73W–74L career · 1 line in 2021
<1%89%10%
2.84
3
Krissie Summerhays
110W–123L career · 5 lines in 2021
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Holly Ricker
58W–151L career · type A · 8 lines in 2021
49%51%<1%
2.50
2.5
Kristin Rocke
22W–44L career · 3 lines in 2021
0%99%1%
2.18
Kelly Lund
39W–39L career · 2 lines in 2021
not enough data
Shelly Logue
26W–19L career · 1 line in 2021
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.