Teams

Sunpro-Belliston/Anderson

2022 Fall Outdoor League-Weekday · 3.0W

13 players · average NTRP 3.17 / 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
2022-10-19vs Sports Mall-Majors/JensenLost 02
L#1 SinglesKim Ward vs Cosette Tregeagle0-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesCarrie Jensen / Beatriz Velazquez vs Camille Weaver / Brenda Green6-4, 4-6, 0-1
2022-10-12vs Sports Mall-Lyon/GeorgeLost 02
L#1 DoublesCarrie Jensen / Raquel Moss vs Tiffany Zarbock / Emily Peterson4-6, 1-6
L#4 DoublesBrittney Michelle / Jill Marsh vs Lora Lyon / Hallie Russell4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2022-10-05vs Wasatch Rec Center-Davis/McBrideSplit 11
L#2 DoublesLiz Rowley / Robyn Cardon vs Jessica Larson / Jocelyn Bennion7-6, 5-7, 0-1
W#4 DoublesJill Marsh / Beatriz Velazquez vs Jessica Ritchie / Katie Studdert6-1, 6-3
2022-09-28vs Ivory Ridge-McCord/WilyLost 02
L#3 DoublesBeatriz Velazquez / Liz Rowley vs Gaylynn Gale / Camille Ross2-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#4 DoublesJill Marsh / Kim Ward vs Heidi Beckstead / Valine Vikari1-6, 2-6
2022-09-14vs Red Ledges-Overton/WoodSplit 11
L#1 DoublesCyndi Madsen / Robyn Cardon vs Jennifer Stone / Jen Dagley1-6, 4-6
W#4 DoublesJill Marsh / Beatriz Velazquez vs Megan Overton / Suzette Cannon6-7, 6-3, 1-0
2022-09-07vs Liberty Park Tennis-BastianLost 03
L#1 DoublesCarrie Jensen / Raquel Moss vs Jaime Vance / KayeLynn BASTIAN4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesBrittney Michelle / Beatriz Velazquez vs Jennifer Tooley / Maria Pettit3-6, 1-6
L#4 DoublesJill Marsh / Kim Ward vs Mary Jane Swalberg / Mary Jayne Child3-6, 7-5, 1-0
2022-08-31vs Sports Mall-Majors/JensenLost 01
L#4 DoublesBeatriz Velazquez / Jill Marsh vs Trisha Cutrer / Angela Jensen3-6, 4-6
2022-08-24vs Sports Mall-Lyon/GeorgeLost 12
W#1 DoublesCarrie Jensen / Raquel Moss vs Emily Peterson / Erin Bradley6-2, 6-4
L#3 DoublesMandy Petersen / Liz Rowley vs Alycia Anthony / Kassie Butt6-1, 4-6, 0-1
L#4 DoublesJill Marsh / Kim Ward vs Heather George / Kami Galbraith3-6, 6-4, 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 standings for 3.0W 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 3.01 estimated across 8 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.

3.62
Jill Marsh
usually #4 Doubles 100% · published
3.21
Liz Rowley
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.15
Shannon Fredericks
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.03
Cherylin Winkel
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
2.87
Raquel Moss
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.83
Carrie Jensen
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.79
Cyndi Madsen
usually #4 Doubles 39%, also #2 Doubles 31% · published 3
Beatriz Velazquez
usually #4 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Gina Anderson
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.57
LaRicia Belliston
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Kim Ward
usually #4 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
Mandy Petersen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Robyn Cardon
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Liz Rowley + Mandy Petersen6267% games+10.6% vs expected
Liz Rowley + Jill Marsh16265% games+8.5% vs expected
LaRicia Belliston + Shannon Fredericks4163% games+7.6% vs expected
Cyndi Madsen + Gina Anderson5551% games+6.8% vs expected
Beatriz Velazquez + Jill Marsh7163% games+5.4% vs expected
Cyndi Madsen + Cherylin Winkel13859% games+5.0% vs expected
Carrie Jensen + Cherylin Winkel161056% games+4.5% vs expected
Cyndi Madsen + Raquel Moss331758% games+2.9% 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.

Jill Marsh
100W–41L career · 7 lines in 2022
17%82%<1%
3.62
3.5
Liz Rowley
98W–66L career · 5 lines in 2022
5%93%1%
3.21
3.5
Shannon Fredericks
89W–63L career · 5 lines in 2022
13%86%<1%
3.15
3.5
Cherylin Winkel
112W–142L career · 5 lines in 2022
42%58%<1%
3.03
3
Raquel Moss
123W–111L career · 7 lines in 2022
<1%85%15%
2.87
3
Carrie Jensen
138W–169L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%90%9%
2.83
3
Cyndi Madsen
120W–134L career · 13 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
2.79
3
Beatriz Velazquez
58W–39L career · 6 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Gina Anderson
46W–64L career · 8 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
LaRicia Belliston
85W–115L career · 6 lines in 2022
30%70%<1%
2.57
Kim Ward
2W–23L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Mandy Petersen
18W–14L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Robyn Cardon
14W–24L career · 2 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.