Teams

Cottonwood Club-Haverkost

2026 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 3.5W PM

22 players · average NTRP 3.27 / 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
2026-06-03Lost 01
L#1 SinglesTaylor Haverkost vs Yolanda Morris3-6, 3-6
2026-05-27Won 10
W#2 SinglesTaylor Haverkost vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2026-05-20Won 10
W#1 SinglesTaylor Haverkost vs Jennie Stacey6-2, 6-3
2026-05-13vs BaynaWon 10
W#1 DoublesLora Lyon / Lori Carter vs Katrina Mills / Kalaiselvi Seetharaman6-4, 6-3
2026-05-06Lost 01
L#1 SinglesTaylor Haverkost vs Lauren Bryce3-6, 5-7
2026-04-22Won 10
W#1 DoublesLora Lyon / Lori Carter vs Melissa Hofmann / Bessy Nielson6-3, 6-4
2026-04-18vs SM-Harris & the Serve-IvorsWon 10
W#1 DoublesKelly Webster / Lori Carter vs Stacia Carroll / Rebecca Myers6-4, 6-4
2026-04-08vs Utah Valley-OrozcoWon 10
W#2 SinglesLori Carter vs Grace Neff6-2, 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 3.5W PM 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 3.11 estimated across 21 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.

3.40
Taylor Haverkost
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.40
Lori Carter
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
3.30
Haley H Moreno
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.28
Michelle Lynn Maxfield
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.26
Lora Lyon
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.25
Jane Woolley
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
3.24
Mary Diaz Gordon
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Singles 22% · published 3.5
3.24
Heather Sliwa
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
3.21
Karol Liced Sanchez Vanegas
usually #1 Singles 46%, also #2 Singles 27% · published
3.20
Lauren Annunziata
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.17
Kelly Webster
usually #2 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.14
Dawn Farrell
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published 3.5
3.14
Lindy Parks
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.10
Kumru Uruk
usually #3 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.04
Ally Lyle
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3
3.01
Jamuna Nielsen
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
2.91
Amanda Krejci
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published 3
2.88
Melissa Child
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published 3
2.77
Krissie Summerhays
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #1 Doubles 23% · published 3
2.69
Mikelle Moore
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.60
Kristina Maljovec
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Tam Pham
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.

Karol Liced Sanchez Vanegas + Jane Woolley5077% games+18.0% vs expected
Melissa Child + Haley H Moreno7066% games+11.5% vs expected
Amanda Krejci + Jane Woolley12559% games+10.4% vs expected
Jamuna Nielsen + Mary Diaz Gordon10360% games+9.3% vs expected
Lori Carter + Haley H Moreno11162% games+7.5% vs expected
Kumru Uruk + Kelly Webster1454% games+6.4% vs expected
Mary Diaz Gordon + Jane Woolley6260% games+6.2% vs expected
Krissie Summerhays + Lora Lyon2747% games+6.1% 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.

3.5
Taylor Haverkost
138W–62L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%76%24%
3.40
Lori Carter
107W–54L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%77%23%
3.40
Haley H Moreno
82W–46L career · 9 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.30
3.5
Michelle Lynn Maxfield
84W–58L career · 6 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.28
Lora Lyon
101W–81L career · 7 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
3.26
Jane Woolley
77W–34L career · 7 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.25
3.5
Mary Diaz Gordon
108W–65L career · 9 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.24
Heather Sliwa
82W–61L career · 7 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.24
Karol Liced Sanchez Vanegas
90W–56L career · 11 lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.21
3.5
Lauren Annunziata
136W–138L career · 5 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.20
Kelly Webster
196W–131L career · 9 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.17
3.5
Dawn Farrell
127W–111L career · 11 lines in 2026
15%84%1%
3.14
3.5
Lindy Parks
120W–90L career · 2 lines in 2026
15%84%1%
3.14
Kumru Uruk
49W–77L career · 9 lines in 2026
24%76%<1%
3.10
3
Ally Lyle
43W–20L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%39%61%
3.04
3.5
Jamuna Nielsen
126W–120L career · 7 lines in 2026
48%52%<1%
3.01
3
Amanda Krejci
62W–55L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
2.91
3
Melissa Child
73W–73L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
2.88
3
Krissie Summerhays
109W–122L career · 13 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.77
3
Mikelle Moore
46W–52L career · 9 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
2.69
3
Kristina Maljovec
17W–16L career · 1 line in 2026
25%75%<1%
2.60
Tam Pham
4W–3L career · no lines in 2026
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.