Teams

Wasatch Rec Center-Kelley

2024 USTA Adult 18 & Over · 2.5W AM

12 players · average NTRP 2.93 / 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
2024-06-03vs Cottonwood Club-BarberLost 03
L#1 DoublesChelsie Otteson / Alyson Kelly vs Mary Diaz Gordon / Jane Woolley5-7, 2-6
L#1 SinglesChelsea Watts vs Tam Pham5-7, 4-6
L#2 DoublesSharilee Hill / Lisa Candland vs Amanda Krejci / Kylee Bryson3-6, 5-7
2024-05-20vs Sports Mall-Callister/FirthLost 02
L#1 DoublesRena Bucad / Michelle Nielsen vs Heather Callister / Heidi Firth0-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesNike Hawkes / Crystal Nielsen vs Ava Conti / Olivia Moreton3-6, 7-5, 0-1
2024-05-13vs Park City MARC-LlewellynLost 02
L#1 DoublesChelsie Otteson / Jessica Ritchie vs Margaret Bloomer / Bridget Llewellyn2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesCrystal Nielsen / Suly Cates vs Dania Lees / Megan Johnstone1-6, 3-6
2024-05-06vs Liberty Park Tennis-JacksonWon 21
W#1 DoublesSharilee Hill / Chelsea Watts vs Suzanne Kingsford / Niki Evans6-2, 6-3
L#1 SinglesAlyson Kelly vs Teresa Jackson4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesCrystal Nielsen / Chelsie Otteson vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#1 DoublesSharilee Hill / Alyson Kelly vs Travis Treat / Ruth Russell4-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#1 SinglesMichelle Nielsen vs Bianca Schwarz5-7, 1-6
W#2 DoublesNike Hawkes / Crystal Nielsen vs Stephanie Betteridge / Kristi Winder6-4, 7-5
2024-04-29vs Sunpro-Dunn/CookLost 02
L#1 DoublesAlyson Kelly / Michelle Nielsen vs Stephanie Webb / Andrea Cook1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesChelsea Watts / Lisa Candland vs Emily Hill / Julia Nixon7-5, 4-2
2024-04-15Lost 03
L#1 DoublesMichelle Nielsen / Nike Hawkes vs Sara Turley / Tam Pham1-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesRena Bucad vs Amanda Krejci2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesSuly Cates / Chelsie Otteson vs Jamie Tate / Jane Woolley1-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesNike Hawkes / Chelsea Watts vs Ruth Russell / Travis Treat7-5, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesRena Bucad / Crystal Nielsen vs Kristi Winder / Catherine Woahn6-1, 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 standings4 teams · 2.5W AM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Wasatch Hill-Iverson/Dooliln7117718204
2Park City MARC-Llewellyn44131125193
3Sports Mall-Callister/Firth35101433234
4Wasatch Rec Center-Kelley2681632237

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 2.54 estimated across 11 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.

2.93
Chelsie Otteson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.83
Chelsea Watts
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3
2.79
Sharilee Hill
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.75
Rachel Kahler
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
2.55
Nike Hawkes
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.49
Jessica Ritchie
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.44
Michelle Nielsen
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
2.40
Crystal Nielsen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.28
Alyson Kelly
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 2.5
2.28
Suly Cates
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.19
Lisa Candland
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Rena Bucad
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 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.

Jessica Ritchie + Chelsie Otteson4165% games+15.2% vs expected
Chelsie Otteson + Chelsea Watts9458% games+5.7% vs expected
Alyson Kelly + Chelsie Otteson4648% games−0.0% vs expected
Chelsea Watts + Nike Hawkes4547% games−0.1% vs expected
Chelsie Otteson + Crystal Nielsen2448% games−4.8% vs expected
Alyson Kelly + Lisa Candland2443% games−8.2% vs expected
Crystal Nielsen + Nike Hawkes3743% games−9.0% vs expected
Michelle Nielsen + Alyson Kelly41039% games−11.0% 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
Chelsie Otteson
49W–32L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%70%30%
2.93
3
Chelsea Watts
32W–24L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%88%11%
2.83
3
Sharilee Hill
73W–68L career · 6 lines in 2024
2%92%6%
2.79
3
Rachel Kahler
44W–30L career · 4 lines in 2024
4%93%4%
2.75
3
Nike Hawkes
29W–19L career · 4 lines in 2024
35%65%<1%
2.55
Jessica Ritchie
33W–59L career · 1 line in 2024
53%47%<1%
2.49
Michelle Nielsen
43W–54L career · 4 lines in 2024
0%66%34%
2.44
3
Crystal Nielsen
21W–26L career · type A · 4 lines in 2024
77%23%<1%
2.40
2.5
Alyson Kelly
40W–72L career · 4 lines in 2024
0%94%6%
2.28
Suly Cates
20W–23L career · 2 lines in 2024
0%94%6%
2.28
Lisa Candland
16W–31L career · 2 lines in 2024
0%99%1%
2.19
Rena Bucad
16W–31L career · 3 lines in 2024
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.