← Teams

Senioritas

2022 Fall Combo -2 Sundays · 6.5 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.12 / ALASKA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2021-09-19vs Oat's Hot ShotsLost 0–3
L#1 DoublesMarcia Howell / Barbara Jacobs vs Cheevarat Wongsaree / Angelina Salvato1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesChristy Lee / Kathy McArthur vs Walaiporn Sukanthanag / Saharra McKee7-6
L#3 DoublesVicki Moe / Cecilia Hopper vs Emily Elison / Lucille Abe0-6, 1-6
2021-09-19vs Oat's Hot ShotsLost 0–3
L#1 DoublesVicki Moe / Dolores Alley vs Lucille Abe / Walaiporn Sukanthanag3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesCecilia Hopper / Christy Lee vs Emily Elison / Angelina Salvato4-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesDana Griffin / Barbara Jacobs vs Cheevarat Wongsaree / Saharra McKee0-6, 2-6
2021-09-12vs Oat's Hot ShotsLost 1–2
L#1 DoublesCecilia Hopper / Marcia Howell vs Saharra McKee / Cheevarat Wongsaree1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesDolores Alley / Christy Lee vs Triin Minton / Walaiporn Sukanthanag0-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesKathy McArthur / Dana Griffin vs Angelina Salvato / Emily Elison1-6, 7-6, 1-0
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 6.5 Women 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 2.90 estimated across 3 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.

3.06
Dana Griffin
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.89
Cecilia Hopper
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.76
Kathy McArthur
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
—
Barbara Jacobs
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
—
Dolores Alley
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 0
—
Marcia Howell
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 0
—
Vicki Moe
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Marcia Howell + Dana Griffin2–736% gamesnot enough data
Dolores Alley + Kathy McArthur2–351% gamesnot enough data
Cecilia Hopper + Kathy McArthur4–04 matchesnot enough data
Dana Griffin + Barbara Jacobs2–13 matchesnot enough data
Dolores Alley + Cecilia Hopper2–13 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
Dana Griffin
111W–86L career · 4 lines in 2022
33%67%<1%
3.06
3
Cecilia Hopper
42W–37L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%79%21%
2.89
3
Kathy McArthur
64W–98L career · 2 lines in 2022
2%95%3%
2.76
3
Barbara Jacobs
21W–47L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
—
0
Dolores Alley
34W–41L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
—
0
Marcia Howell
45W–56L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
—
—
Vicki Moe
14W–10L career · 2 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.