Teams

CROW CANYON CC CW6.5A

2025 COMBO · Women 6.5

23 players · average NTRP 3.25 / NO. 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 →
Schedule3 played
2025-10-08vs VALLEY VISTA RC/VVRC COURTS CW6.5ALost 03
L#1 DoublesDebbie Baker / Chesica Hall vs Jill Freeman / Carissa Swanson3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCindy Raykiewicz / Tine Ankersen vs Belinda Castillo / Florita Labrador6-2, 5-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesEmily Amott / Maureen Peer vs Michelle Cooke / Angela Schmidt0-6, 5-7
2025-09-20vs FREMONT TC CW6.5BLost 12
L#1 DoublesDebbie Baker / Romeda Arsanjani vs Ella Hurd / Debby Heicklen2-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesLea McSweeney / Lisa Henderson vs Rose Keogh / Renisa Satrijo7-5, 6-2
L#3 DoublesDana Kruger / Kay Warneke vs Nancy Pizzo / Melissa Vuckovich2-6, 3-6
2025-08-30vs BAY CLUB PL CW6.5BLost 03
L#1 DoublesShelley Lober / Chandavone Reeder vs Katherine Hwang / Meixiang Ding5-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesGayle Millington / KIM HOLLAND vs Julie Shi / Caimei Lei1-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesCindy Raykiewicz / Romeda Arsanjani vs Flora Tang / Lihong Chao3-6, 5-7
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 Women 6.5 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 3.01 estimated across 20 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.

3.37
Shelley Lober
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.36
KIM HOLLAND
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.28
Emily Amott
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.28
April Mundy
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.21
Lea McSweeney
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.16
Dana Kruger
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.16
Lisa Henderson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.15
Cindy Raykiewicz
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.10
Romeda Arsanjani
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.04
Debbie Baker
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.01
Priscilla Z Behidj
published
2.99
Tine Ankersen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.89
Chandavone Reeder
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.89
Chesica Hall
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.88
Gayle Millington
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.82
Lisa San Vicente
published
2.79
Karen Schumann
published
2.76
Maureen Peer
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.75
Colleen McClure
published 3
2.34
GLORYA SMITH
published 3
Jessica Ford
published
Kay Warneke
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Myriam Nunez
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.

Lea McSweeney + Debbie Baker3351% games−1.7% vs expected
Chandavone Reeder + Shelley Lober2348% gamesnot enough data
KIM HOLLAND + Tine Ankersen4159% gamesnot enough data
Lea McSweeney + Shelley Lober134 matchesnot enough data
Lisa Henderson + Cindy Raykiewicz224 matchesnot enough data
Cindy Raykiewicz + Dana Kruger134 matchesnot enough data
Lea McSweeney + Emily Amott213 matchesnot enough data
Dana Kruger + Emily Amott033 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.

Shelley Lober
13W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%85%15%
3.37
KIM HOLLAND
13W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%86%14%
3.36
3.5
Emily Amott
10W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
1%94%5%
3.28
3.5
April Mundy
8W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.28
Lea McSweeney
7W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
6%93%1%
3.21
3.5
Dana Kruger
9W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
11%89%<1%
3.16
Lisa Henderson
5W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
11%89%<1%
3.16
3.5
Cindy Raykiewicz
6W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
12%88%<1%
3.15
Romeda Arsanjani
8W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
3.10
3.5
Debbie Baker
13W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
37%63%<1%
3.04
Priscilla Z Behidj
35W–33L career · no lines in 2025
<1%48%52%
3.01
Tine Ankersen
8W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%52%48%
2.99
3
Chandavone Reeder
3W–12L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%80%20%
2.89
3
Chesica Hall
9W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%81%19%
2.89
3
Gayle Millington
5W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%82%18%
2.88
Lisa San Vicente
8W–12L career · no lines in 2025
1%91%8%
2.82
Karen Schumann
1W–4L career · no lines in 2025
94%6%<1%
2.79
Maureen Peer
4W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
2%95%3%
2.76
3
Colleen McClure
2W–7L career · type A · no lines in 2025
3%95%3%
2.75
3
GLORYA SMITH
1W–8L career · no lines in 2025
89%11%<1%
2.34
Jessica Ford
1W–0L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Kay Warneke
0W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Myriam Nunez
1W–2L 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.