Teams

Sellers/18/3.5/WD/CCLA

2025 City Championship 18 & Over - Women Day · 3.5 (18&O) Women Day

18 players · average NTRP 3.50 / LOUISIANA

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 →
Schedule
Flight standings6 teams · 3.5 (18&O) Women Day
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Jeansonne/18/3.5/WD/BOC92381741401
2Allain/18/3.5/WD/LEG92381746399
3Sellers/18/3.5/WD/CCLA74352048463
4Kozar/18/3.0/WD/UC74312454448
5LABBE/18/3.5/WD/BREC29173882566
6Temple/18/3.5/WD/BREC110183776521

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 3.29 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.

3.51
Randi Peltier
published
3.46
Leslie Houser
published
3.42
Cherie Favaro
published 3.5
3.41
Cheryl Moreaux
published 3.5
3.32
Ellen Pino
published 3.5
3.31
Tricia Bruno
published
3.31
Melissa Peairs
published
3.29
Alletia Sellers
published 3.5
3.28
Julie Talbot
published
3.22
Katie South
published
3.19
TIne Neames
published
3.04
Christy Mendoza
published 3.5
2.96
Marsha Jumonville
published
Jill Prosper
published
Joanne Harvey
published
Julia Boyce
published
Kara Hebert
published
Marinell Hunt
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.

Leslie Houser + Randi Peltier6074% games+20.3% vs expected
Randi Peltier + Cheryl Moreaux6257% games+5.7% vs expected
Cherie Favaro + Tricia Bruno7457% games+1.9% vs expected
Alletia Sellers + Tricia Bruno4949% games−3.8% vs expected
Tricia Bruno + Katie South5164% gamesnot enough data
Cherie Favaro + Leslie Houser4155% gamesnot enough data
Cherie Favaro + Alletia Sellers1446% gamesnot enough data
Leslie Houser + Tricia Bruno5073% gamesnot 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.

Randi Peltier
59W–21L career · no lines in 2025
<1%46%54%
3.51
Leslie Houser
40W–12L career · no lines in 2025
<1%62%38%
3.46
3.5
Cherie Favaro
52W–50L career · no lines in 2025
<1%73%27%
3.42
3.5
Cheryl Moreaux
42W–17L career · no lines in 2025
<1%76%24%
3.41
3.5
Ellen Pino
32W–22L career · no lines in 2025
1%91%9%
3.32
Tricia Bruno
43W–28L career · no lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31
Melissa Peairs
43W–28L career · no lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Alletia Sellers
33W–34L career · no lines in 2025
1%93%5%
3.29
Julie Talbot
52W–27L career · no lines in 2025
2%94%5%
3.28
Katie South
38W–15L career · no lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.22
TIne Neames
49W–55L career · no lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.19
3.5
Christy Mendoza
19W–22L career · no lines in 2025
37%63%<1%
3.04
Marsha Jumonville
10W–18L career · no lines in 2025
61%39%<1%
2.96
Jill Prosper
18W–6L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Joanne Harvey
4W–4L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Julia Boyce
0W–3L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Kara Hebert
0W–12L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Marinell Hunt
0W–1L career · no lines in 2025
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.