Teams

Cottonwood Club-Summerhays/Havercost

2022 ITA Mixed 18 & Over · mixed 6.5 18 & over

24 players · average NTRP 3.15 / 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
2022-09-16vs Sports Mall-Henderson/WalljasperLost 03
L#1 DoublesLindy Parks / Ronald Paredes vs Miranda Edwards / Ryan Farr1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesErin Arico / Joseph Arico vs Baovuong Nguyen / Yoko Walljasper2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesTaylor Haverkost / Ben Haverkost vs Esther Hatch / Arunnatesh Muthukkumaraswamy3-6, 3-6
2022-09-09vs Ivory Ridge-RowlandLost 03
L#1 DoublesMikelle Moore / Kevin Flamm vs Jason Rowland / Esther Rowland4-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMagdalena Kovacsovics / Tibor Kovacsovics vs Gayle Waldron / George Gary Waldron6-7, 6-2, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJane Chandramouli / Dan Murray vs Camille Ross / Ryan Ross3-6, 4-6
2022-08-26vs Ivory Ridge-PatchLost 12
L#1 DoublesAlison Parsons / Todd Martin vs Maxime de la Grange / Melanie de la Grange3-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesDan Murray / Jane Chandramouli vs Sean Lee / Melissa Reoch2-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesChad Fullmer / Krissie Summerhays vs Carrie Jensen / Scott T Jensen7-6, 7-5
2022-08-06vs Sports Mall-Nelson/BaynaLost 12
L#1 DoublesStephanie Gelman / Peter Moskowitz vs Abhay Pawar / McCall Shoff2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesBen Haverkost / Taylor Haverkost vs Dean Bachman / JaNean Nelson6-0, 6-3
L#3 DoublesDan Murray / Krissie Summerhays vs Darren Nelson / Elma Tatarevic1-6, 0-6
2022-08-05vs South Jordan-RoseWon 21
W#1 DoublesTodd Martin / Alison Parsons vs Emma Li / Oliver Duran6-4, 6-4
L#2 DoublesTibor Kovacsovics / Magdalena Kovacsovics vs Ronald Zimmerman / Deborah Warner1-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesHoward Davis / Lindy Parks vs Nicholas Shaffer / Angela Santiago1-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#1 DoublesStephanie Gelman / Peter Moskowitz vs Stacy Criddle / Brent Criddle7-6, 7-5
L#2 DoublesSuzanne Headden / David Headden vs Karla Block / Mark Follette4-6, 6-7
W#3 DoublesJane Chandramouli / Dan Murray vs Nicole Leatham / Brian Smith4-6, 6-4, 1-0
2022-07-22vs Sports Mall-BradleyLost 12
L#1 DoublesDan Murray / Holly Ricker vs Rebecca England / Zach England0-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesChad Fullmer / Krissie Summerhays vs Emily Peterson / Paul Peterson2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesTodd Martin / Alison Parsons vs Scot Safford / Kristi Mecham6-7, 6-4, 1-0
2022-07-15vs Liberty Park Tennis-TorresLost 03
L#1 DoublesKevin Flamm / Mikelle Moore vs Lindsey Ramage / Cory Ramage5-7, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJoseph Arico / Erin Arico vs Molly Adams / Fernando Torres1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesTaylor Haverkost / Ben Haverkost vs Milad Sefiddashti / Jamie DeLong1-6, 4-6
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 standings4 teams · mixed 6.5 18 & over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Sports Mall-Nelson/Bayna8020410149
2Sports Mall-Bradley53131126209
3Salt Lake Tennis-Ostrander/Ostrander44121224197
4Cottonwood Club-Summerhays/Havercost2671737265

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 2.87 estimated across 10 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.

3.41
Taylor Haverkost
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.22
Ben Haverkost
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.12
Lindy Parks
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.06
Kevin Flamm
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.96
Dan Murray
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.77
Krissie Summerhays
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Alison Parsons
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
Chad Fullmer
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Erin Arico
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Howard Davis
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Jane Chandramouli
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.69
Mikelle Moore
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.57
Ronald Paredes
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.50
Holly Ricker
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.42
Stephanie Gelman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Joseph Arico
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kelly Lund
published
Magdalena Kovacsovics
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Peter Moskowitz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Robin Asmar
published
Shelly Logue
published
Suzanne Headden
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Tibor Kovacsovics
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Todd Martin
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Taylor Haverkost + Ben Haverkost8358% games+6.5% vs expected
Joseph Arico + Erin Arico5843% games+2.7% vs expected
Howard Davis + Jane Chandramouli4645% games+1.7% vs expected
Kevin Flamm + Mikelle Moore5847% games+1.5% vs expected
Magdalena Kovacsovics + Tibor Kovacsovics2640% games+0.2% vs expected
Alison Parsons + Todd Martin5350% games+0.1% vs expected
Krissie Summerhays + Chad Fullmer3845% games−6.3% vs expected
Stephanie Gelman + Peter Moskowitz1636% gamesnot 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
Taylor Haverkost
138W–62L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%75%24%
3.41
3.5
Ben Haverkost
55W–19L career · 3 lines in 2022
5%94%2%
3.22
3.5
Lindy Parks
121W–91L career · 2 lines in 2022
17%83%<1%
3.12
3.5
Kevin Flamm
21W–27L career · 2 lines in 2022
34%66%<1%
3.06
3
Dan Murray
109W–127L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%62%38%
2.96
3
Krissie Summerhays
110W–123L career · 3 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Alison Parsons
20W–23L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Chad Fullmer
18W–28L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Erin Arico
17W–33L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Howard Davis
42W–82L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
3
Jane Chandramouli
60W–125L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Mikelle Moore
46W–52L career · 2 lines in 2022
7%92%1%
2.69
Ronald Paredes
30W–41L career · 1 line in 2022
31%69%<1%
2.57
3
Holly Ricker
58W–151L career · type A · 1 line in 2022
49%51%<1%
2.50
Stephanie Gelman
33W–61L career · 2 lines in 2022
74%26%<1%
2.42
Joseph Arico
53W–65L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Kelly Lund
39W–39L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Magdalena Kovacsovics
51W–86L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Peter Moskowitz
1W–6L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Robin Asmar
26W–67L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Shelly Logue
26W–19L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Suzanne Headden
16W–26L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Tibor Kovacsovics
14W–22L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Todd Martin
32W–48L career · 3 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.