Teams

Sports Mall-Thompson/Brown

2023 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 3.5W AM

15 players · average NTRP 4.00 / 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
2023-05-30Won 20
W#1 DoublesDeeAnn Henderson / Brooke Stewart vs Ann Trentman / Kathi Poggi6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesEsther Hatch / Julie Black vs Kadee Wolfgram / Mithona Nielsen6-1, 6-7, 1-0
2023-05-23Won 20
W#2 DoublesEsther Hatch / Deb Chaltron vs Kaye Moulding / Becky Hall2-6, 6-0, 1-0
W#2 SinglesKristy Olsen vs Anna Palmer5-7, 6-3, 1-0
2023-05-19Won 10
W#2 DoublesJulie Black / Deb Chaltron vs Julie Hall / Kim Cronin7-6, 4-6, 1-0
2023-05-16vs Ivory Ridge-Rowland/AubreyWon 20
W#1 SinglesBrooke Stewart vs Mindy Black6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesEsther Hatch / Kristy Olsen vs Chris Peterson / Catherine Peterson6-1, 6-4
2023-05-09vs Park City MARC-Smith/ThomasSplit 11
L#2 DoublesTrisha Cutrer / Esther Hatch vs Summer Thomas / Samantha Levin3-6, 6-7
W#2 SinglesKristy Olsen vs Kristi Johnson6-1, 6-4
2023-05-02Won 20
W#1 DoublesMartha Brown / Brooke Stewart vs Karen Wilson / Denise Daniels6-3, 7-5
W#2 DoublesDeb Chaltron / Julie Black vs Amy Allen / Angie Haskins6-1, 7-6
2023-04-25Won 30
W#1 DoublesErin Bradley / Brooke Stewart vs Jennifer Tooley / Rebecca Harman6-0, 6-0
W#2 SinglesKristy Olsen vs Jessica Whittaker5-7, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJulie Black / Deb Chaltron vs Maria Pettit / Diane Poole6-1, 6-3
2023-04-18Won 20
W#1 DoublesDeb Chaltron / Martha Brown vs Michelle Weddington / Lindsay Andersen7-6, 6-4
W#3 DoublesJulie Black / Brooke Stewart vs Sarah Love / Deanne Goaslind6-2, 6-1
W#1 DoublesBrooke Stewart / Martha Brown vs Michelle Cutler / Melissa Despain7-5, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJulie Black / Deb Chaltron vs Megan Harbertson / Emily Stones6-4, 7-6
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 3.5W AM 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 3.68 estimated across 13 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.

3.91
Martha Brown
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.85
Trisha Cutrer
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.84
Kat Fuller
usually #2 Doubles 36%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published 4
3.83
Tiffany Zarbock
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 13% · published 4
3.77
Deb Chaltron
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.76
McCall Shoff
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
Brooke Stewart
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published 4
Esther Hatch
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.71
Erin Bradley
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.69
Aurie Colligan
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Doubles 11% · published 4
3.66
Amber Thompson
usually #2 Singles 46%, also #1 Singles 18% · published 4
3.60
Elma Tatarevic
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published 4
3.58
DeeAnn Henderson
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 36% · published 4
3.40
Julie Black
usually #3 Doubles 73%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published
3.20
Kristy Olsen
usually #2 Singles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · 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.

Amber Thompson + Aurie Colligan3257% games+13.5% vs expected
Kat Fuller + Martha Brown12565% games+13.0% vs expected
McCall Shoff + Elma Tatarevic5064% games+12.4% vs expected
Kat Fuller + Trisha Cutrer362357% games+12.2% vs expected
Kristy Olsen + Esther Hatch5167% games+10.7% vs expected
Aurie Colligan + Martha Brown7267% games+10.6% vs expected
Amber Thompson + Julie Black13271% games+10.4% vs expected
Kat Fuller + DeeAnn Henderson7167% games+10.1% 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.

Martha Brown
202W–72L career · 10 lines in 2023
<1%76%24%
3.91
4
Trisha Cutrer
216W–112L career · 15 lines in 2023
<1%87%13%
3.85
4
Kat Fuller
131W–95L career · 11 lines in 2023
<1%89%10%
3.84
4
Tiffany Zarbock
164W–100L career · 7 lines in 2023
1%90%10%
3.83
4
Deb Chaltron
132W–62L career · 6 lines in 2023
2%94%4%
3.77
McCall Shoff
79W–10L career · 7 lines in 2023
2%94%3%
3.76
4
Brooke Stewart
40W–7L career · 6 lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Esther Hatch
137W–58L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Erin Bradley
145W–97L career · 5 lines in 2023
5%94%1%
3.71
4
Aurie Colligan
156W–49L career · 9 lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Amber Thompson
131W–110L career · 10 lines in 2023
11%89%<1%
3.66
4
Elma Tatarevic
128W–82L career · 14 lines in 2023
23%77%<1%
3.60
4
DeeAnn Henderson
291W–224L career · 14 lines in 2023
26%74%<1%
3.58
Julie Black
68W–14L career · 11 lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
3.40
Kristy Olsen
72W–64L career · 4 lines in 2023
6%93%1%
3.20

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.