Search

Tena Carter

Alamo, CA
3.5C year-end 2024
117 matches · 51W–66L · seasons 20192026
Bump probability
3.03.54.0lowhigh

Where this rating stands today. Taller means more likely. The dashed lines are the band edges, and the three shaded areas are the three percentages below.

3.10
estimated dynamic rating
Where the rating sits now, on 20 matches this season · USTA never publishes this number
11%
down to 3.0
89%
stay 3.5
0%
up to 4.0
Projected to December: 7% down · 93% stay · 0% up, from a year-end estimate of 3.12. Higher than today’s 3.10 because players this far below their band have historically finished nearer the middle of it.

A 3.5 runs from 3.01 to 3.50. This rating sits in the bottom of the band, and every match moves it.

Our estimate, not a USTA figure — scale measured at this point of 2023 on 2160 players. Graded publicly in December when USTA publishes year-end ratings. It moves when you play, and occasionally when we improve the model.

Where you rank
CA · 3.5
11 of 11

Tena is ranked among players at the same level in the same place, by our estimated dynamic rating — not the published level, which is the same for everyone in the band. Groups smaller than five are not ranked, because a placing out of two is noise dressed as standing.

Over timerating by season, and how you rank
Rating by season

Tena has been 3.5 for all 7 seasons on record, but moved a long way inside it — from the bottom of the band to the top.

3.03.52019202020212022202320242026

The line is our estimate; the horizontal lines are level boundaries, so crossing one is a bump. Hollow points are years we inferred from the level played the following season, because USTA publishes a current rating but no history.

How you rank at your level
At 3.5, Tena has gone from the 64th to the 10th percentile of players at that level, 2021 to 2026.

Percentile compares the same level in the same season, by share of games won. Mixed is shown for context — USTA rules exclude it from your adult rating unless mixed is all you play.

By level6 levels played
3.5
50.8%
30W–29L · 51.6% of games
4.0
1W–2L
not enough matches yet
7.0
20%
2W–8L · 38.8% of games
6.0mixed
0W–3L
not enough matches yet
7.0mixed
40%
14W–21L · 46.2% of games
8.0mixed
0W–1L
not enough matches yet

Games won matters more than matches won — NTRP adjusts on margins.

Match history117 matches
L
Theresa Goodwin / Sushil Rajendranmixed
2026-07-18 · #2 Doubles · 7.0 · with Gary Cain
+0.000below expectation — took 14% of games against 44% expected
6-2, 6-0
W
Edward Anonical / Denise Maeharamixed
2026-07-05 · #3 Doubles · 7.0 · with Matthew Carter
+0.000better than expected — took 59% of games against 46% expected
6-3, 7-6
W
Lisa Haskell / Chris Haskellmixed
2026-06-16 · #1 Doubles · 7.0 · with Greg Pope
+0.000better than expected — took 54% of games against 46% expected
6-4, 6-7, 1-0
L
Molly Johnson / Melissa Isola
2026-06-10 · #3 Doubles · 3.5 · with Michelle Bauer
+0.025better than expected — took 48% of games against 38% expected
4-6, 6-4, 1-0
L
Marci Dublin / Christa Schenk
2026-05-28 · #3 Doubles · 3.5 · with Michelle Bauer
0.039below expectation — took 25% of games against 46% expected
6-4, 6-0
W
Maryam Amini / Penny Lane
2026-05-14 · #2 Doubles · 3.5 · with Kristen Loughmiller
+0.015better than expected — took 54% of games against 48% expected
0-6, 6-0, 1-0
L
Erin Brindley / Valerie Epting
2026-05-09 · #3 Doubles · 3.5 · with Cecily Barclay
0.036below expectation — took 25% of games against 45% expected
6-1, 6-3
L
Karen Treppa / Lani Aurelius
2026-05-07 · #3 Doubles · 7.0 · with Andrea Eubanks
+0.007about as expected — took 43% of games against 41% expected
7-6, 6-4
W
Maryam Amini / Barbara Harris
2026-04-19 · #3 Doubles · 3.5 · with Michelle Bauer
+0.019better than expected — took 56% of games against 47% expected
3-6, 6-2, 1-0
L
Cathy Harris / Jennifer Yolasan
2026-04-17 · #2 Doubles · 3.5 · with Suzanne Peck
0.014below expectation — took 37% of games against 45% expected
6-4, 6-3
L
Tami Finegold / Cheryl Smith
2026-04-14 · #2 Doubles · 7.0 · with Margaret Simor
0.038below expectation — took 25% of games against 46% expected
6-3, 6-1
W
Cheryl Cushing / Vanessa Imberg
2026-04-06 · #3 Doubles · 7.0 · with Nanny Tunnell
+0.042better than expected — took 67% of games against 46% expected
6-2, 6-4
What an account addsprivate to you

Signing in lets you point an account at your own record and keep things alongside it: notes on individual matches, your racquet and string setup, restring reminders, friendly matches that never reach TennisLink, and a diary of what you changed and what happened after.

None of it is visible to anyone else. Not to other players, not on your public page, not in search. Every private table is scoped to your account at the database level, so it is enforced rather than promised. The public page you are looking at is built from USTA match results and nothing else.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Rating shown is the published USTA year-end figure; match data is from USTA TennisLink.