Teams

GEPTA/18&over/2.5W/McCarthy/EPTC#2

SouthernNewMexico · 2026 USA SPRING ADULT 18 & OVER LEAGUE

11 players · average NTRP 2.57 / GEPTA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-05-04vs GEPTA/18&over/2.5W/Villa/EPTC#4Won 10
W#1 DoublesFreneci Silva / Claudia Ponce vs Nayeli Moreno / Ana Perez6-1, 6-0
2026-04-13vs GEPTA/18&over/2.5W/Heras/EPTC#1Won 10
W#1 DoublesFreneci Silva / Monica Bordagaray vs Sophia De La Parra / Mara Huerta6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesFreneci Silva / Yvonne Gomez vs Ana Einaudi / Aldonza Delgado6-1, 6-0
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 2026 USA SPRING ADULT 18 & OVER LEAGUE 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 2.45 estimated across 7 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.

3.15
Freneci Silva
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.45
CARMEN LEMUS
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #1 Singles 29% · published 2.5
2.38
Esther McCarthy
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
2.37
Claudia Ponce
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
2.34
Diana M Perez
usually #2 Doubles 36%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published 2.5
2.28
Hossana Gallegos
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 35% · published 2.5
2.18
Cecilia Delgado
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published 2.5
Jennifer Vida
published
Monica Bordagaray
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Veronicq Gallegos
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
Yvonne Gomez
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · 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.

Monica Bordagaray + Esther McCarthy3946% gamesnot enough data
Esther McCarthy + Cecilia Delgado1440% gamesnot enough data
Esther McCarthy + Hossana Gallegos3253% gamesnot enough data
Cecilia Delgado + Diana M Perez3255% gamesnot enough data
Hossana Gallegos + Diana M Perez2347% gamesnot enough data
Hossana Gallegos + CARMEN LEMUS044 matchesnot enough data
Cecilia Delgado + Hossana Gallegos213 matchesnot enough data
Hossana Gallegos + Claudia Ponce213 matchesnot 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
Freneci Silva
3W–0L career · type D · 3 lines in 2026
<1%12%88%
3.15
2.5
CARMEN LEMUS
33W–21L career · 24 lines in 2026
0%64%36%
2.45
2.5
Esther McCarthy
75W–87L career · 24 lines in 2026
0%82%18%
2.38
2.5
Claudia Ponce
22W–17L career · 18 lines in 2026
0%85%15%
2.37
2.5
Diana M Perez
10W–19L career · 11 lines in 2026
0%89%11%
2.34
2.5
Hossana Gallegos
18W–27L career · 20 lines in 2026
0%95%5%
2.28
2.5
Cecilia Delgado
28W–43L career · 28 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.18
Jennifer Vida
0W–2L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Monica Bordagaray
40W–96L career · 30 lines in 2026
not enough data
Veronicq Gallegos
4W–8L career · 10 lines in 2026
not enough data
Yvonne Gomez
6W–14L career · 10 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.