← Teams

PTC-Hill/Habafy

2026 Adult 18 & Over · 3.5 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.5 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.37 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.

3.53
Colleen Kellogg
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.48
Michelle Johnson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.47
Nina Bakos
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.44
Sarah Mutal
usually #2 Doubles 56%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.37
Reiko Maeda
usually #2 Doubles 27%, also #1 Singles 18% · published 3.5
3.32
Kara Place
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.32
Annette Hill
usually #2 Doubles 86%, also #1 Doubles 14% · published 3.5
3.31
May Graham
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 14% · published 3.5
3.31
Chelsea Place
usually #3 Doubles 71%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.28
Miriam Habafy
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published 3.5
3.25
Penny Langhammer
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #2 Singles 17% · published 3.5
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.

3.5
Colleen Kellogg
65W–69L career
0%74%26%
3.53
3.5
Michelle Johnson
82W–102L career
0%86%14%
3.48
3.5
Nina Bakos
42W–24L career
0%85%15%
3.47
3.5
Sarah Mutal
55W–34L career
0%92%8%
3.44
3.5
Reiko Maeda
76W–78L career
0%97%3%
3.37
3.5
Kara Place
41W–25L career
1%97%2%
3.32
3.5
Annette Hill
62W–69L career
0%98%2%
3.32
3.5
May Graham
89W–78L career
0%99%1%
3.31
3.5
Chelsea Place
32W–27L career
0%99%1%
3.31
3.5
Miriam Habafy
105W–81L career
0%99%0%
3.28
3.5
Penny Langhammer
61W–36L career
2%98%1%
3.25

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.