Teams

CV-Palm Springs TC/Ramos & K Rogers

2022 SoCal Doubles - CV · CV Women's 3.5

10 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
W#1 DoublesMary Fox / Wanda Ramos vs Rebecca Jasmine / Gianna Riley6-4, 7-6
L#1 DoublesWanda Ramos / Mary Fox vs COLLEEN Jarrar / Suzette Willetts1-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKathy Rogers / Karen Meyer vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#1 DoublesSue Cannon / Wanda Ramos vs Sanae Chance / Catherine Lind5-7, 5-7
L#3 DoublesKathy Rogers / Susan Hope vs Nadine Kim / Blair Stone1-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#1 DoublesSue Cannon / Staci Munic vs Andrea Howland - Cobb / Barbara Maher6-3, 2-6, 1-0
W#1 DoublesSue Cannon / Wanda Ramos vs Ann Tennyson / Michele Weddle6-7, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMary Fox / Wanda Ramos vs Stephania Denton / Megan Bigbee6-2, 6-1
W#1 DoublesSue Cannon / Celeste Manolas vs Nadine Kim / Patricia Taylor6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesSusan Hope / Kathy Rogers vs Gina Orban / Maribeth Pullman6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesPatricia Baughman / Lorene Peirce vs Sanae Chance / Blair Stone3-4
W#1 DoublesSue Cannon / Wanda Ramos vs Alice Keung / Tammy Roach6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesMary Fox / Kathy Rogers vs Teresa Makhijani / Ailee Robertson6-1, 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 standings for CV Women's 3.5 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 3.44 estimated across 5 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.

3.56
Kathy Rogers
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.51
Celeste Manolas
published 3.5
3.49
Sue Cannon
usually #3 Doubles 46%, also #1 Doubles 46% · published
3.33
Wanda Ramos
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published
3.30
Maria Himelman
published
Lorene Peirce
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Patricia Baughman
published
Staci Munic
published
Susan Caruso
published
Susan Hope
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.

Kathy Rogers + Wanda Ramos1843% gamesnot enough data
Kathy Rogers + Susan Hope5360% gamesnot enough data
Kathy Rogers + Susan Caruso4446% gamesnot enough data
Kathy Rogers + Lorene Peirce224 matchesnot enough data
Wanda Ramos + Lorene Peirce224 matchesnot enough data
Wanda Ramos + Sue Cannon224 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.

3.5
Kathy Rogers
108W–60L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%31%69%
3.56
3.5
Celeste Manolas
5W–0L career · no lines in 2022
<1%48%52%
3.51
Sue Cannon
99W–81L career · 11 lines in 2022
53%47%<1%
3.49
Wanda Ramos
74W–60L career · 10 lines in 2022
1%90%9%
3.33
Maria Himelman
14W–3L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.30
Lorene Peirce
45W–26L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Patricia Baughman
6W–6L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Staci Munic
1W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Caruso
12W–7L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Hope
15W–13L career · no lines in 2022
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.