Teams

Paseo Avengers/Ryken/Valencia High School

2026 Team Singles 18+ SFV Winter · Spring

13 players · average NTRP 3.45 / SO.CALIFORNIA

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 →
Schedule5 played
2026-04-19vs Love at First Serve/Smith/BalboaWon 10
W#3 SinglesJennifer Orwin vs Venita Ryan6-0, 7-5
2026-04-11vs Love at First Serve/Smith/BalboaLost 01
L#2 SinglesDeborah Anderson vs Dalia Sedra3-6, 6-3, 0-1
2026-03-29vs Love at First Serve/Smith/BalboaWon 10
W#3 SinglesDeborah Anderson vs Dalia Sedra6-3, 6-4
2026-03-28vs Love at First Serve/Smith/BalboaWon 10
W#3 SinglesMelanie Delgado vs Venita Ryan5-7, 6-3, 1-0
2026-03-22vs Love at First Serve/Smith/BalboaWon 10
W#2 SinglesJennifer Orwin vs Victoria O Seni6-4, 6-2
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 standings2 teams · Spring
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Paseo Avengers/Ryken/Valencia High School6115616152
2Love at First Serve/Smith/Balboa1661534220

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 3.17 estimated across 13 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.

3.42
Marah Hogendorn
published 3.5
3.37
Renee Volpei
published 3.5
3.29
Lindsey Stoneman
published 3.5
3.26
TANIA JANICEK
published 3.5
3.23
Christine Whigham
published 3.5
3.23
Ali Laventhol
published 3.5
3.18
Salisa Wagner
published 3.5
3.18
Sandy Mandel
published 3.5
3.16
Jennifer Orwin
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published
3.08
Melanie Delgado
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
3.06
Janine Baker
published
2.86
Deborah Anderson
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
2.86
September Ryken
published 3.5
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.

Sandy Mandel + Marah Hogendorn8357% games+7.3% vs expected
Ali Laventhol + Christine Whigham372154% games−1.5% 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.

3.5
Marah Hogendorn
39W–15L career · no lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
3.42
3.5
Renee Volpei
93W–52L career · no lines in 2026
<1%85%15%
3.37
3.5
Lindsey Stoneman
12W–13L career · type S · no lines in 2026
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
TANIA JANICEK
102W–89L career · no lines in 2026
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Christine Whigham
132W–75L career · no lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.23
3.5
Ali Laventhol
163W–119L career · no lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.23
3.5
Salisa Wagner
66W–62L career · no lines in 2026
8%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Sandy Mandel
70W–85L career · no lines in 2026
9%91%1%
3.18
Jennifer Orwin
32W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%11%89%
3.16
Melanie Delgado
18W–23L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%28%72%
3.08
Janine Baker
10W–3L career · no lines in 2026
<1%31%69%
3.06
3
Deborah Anderson
14W–11L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%86%14%
2.86
3.5
September Ryken
81W–221L career · no lines in 2026
86%14%<1%
2.86

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.