Teams

RVR

2022 USTA ADULT 18 & OVER - ASPEN · MOUNTAINS

10 players · average NTRP 3.25 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule2 played
2022-06-08vs GSCCSplit 22
W#1 DoublesMakenzie Eshelman / Zoe Herreid vs Heather Knott / Jeanne Beckley6-2, 6-1
W#1 SinglesKatie Karow vs Angela Johnson6-4, 2-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKaren Fullerton / Suzi Jenkins vs Carolyn Strautman / Shauna de Moraes6-1, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMorgan Warth / Patsy Isaacson vs Suzan Andrus / Lisa Hartert4-6, 1-6
2022-05-23vs MEADOWSWon 31
W#1 DoublesKatie Karow / Makenzie Eshelman vs Alexandra Dalton / Julie Ernst6-0, 6-1
L#1 SinglesMorgan Warth vs Walker Simmons1-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesSherry Beattie / Suzi Jenkins vs Jacqueline Clancy / Donna Bruice7-6, 6-3
W#3 DoublesMichelle Bevington / Danielle King vs Renee Fleisher / Melissa Wilkinson6-2, 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 standings for MOUNTAINS 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 3.09 estimated across 6 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.

3.39
Makenzie Eshelman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.32
Zoe Herreid
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.25
Katie Karow
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.06
Michelle Bevington
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.76
Karen Fullerton
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Danielle King
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.74
Morgan Warth
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
Patsy Isaacson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Sherry Beattie
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Suzi Jenkins
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.

Zoe Herreid + Makenzie Eshelman7260% games+7.1% vs expected
Suzi Jenkins + Patsy Isaacson0536% games−8.2% vs expected
Karen Fullerton + Patsy Isaacson1541% gamesnot enough data
Zoe Herreid + Michelle Bevington4169% gamesnot enough data
Katie Karow + Michelle Bevington2350% gamesnot enough data
Sherry Beattie + Suzi Jenkins224 matchesnot enough data
Karen Fullerton + Michelle Bevington404 matchesnot enough data
Zoe Herreid + Katie Karow404 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.

Makenzie Eshelman
23W–8L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%80%20%
3.39
3.5
Zoe Herreid
68W–24L career · type A · 1 line in 2022
1%91%8%
3.32
Katie Karow
38W–20L career · 2 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.25
Michelle Bevington
38W–14L career · 1 line in 2022
<1%32%68%
3.06
Karen Fullerton
22W–11L career · 1 line in 2022
2%94%3%
2.76
3
Danielle King
6W–4L career · type S · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Morgan Warth
14W–10L career · 2 lines in 2022
3%94%2%
2.74
Patsy Isaacson
8W–19L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Sherry Beattie
10W–12L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Suzi Jenkins
4W–14L 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.