Teams

SGV Fired up Flint-Hegelund-Flint Cyn/WE12:30

2025 Adult Division - 40 & Over - Week Day League - San Gabr · SGV - 3.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.44 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
L#1 DoublesHolly Wolfle Hall / DENISE GICK vs Leslie Levy / Diane Quan6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesHelle Hegelund / Nadine Ono vs Anita Tang / Shannon Koeppen4-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesSandy Mandel vs Shannon Koeppen4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesHelle Hegelund / Holly Wolfle Hall vs Sean Ky / Diane Quan6-7, 2-6
L#1 DoublesAyuko Siegel / DENISE GICK vs Leslie Levy / Milou Lee5-7, 2-6
L#1 DoublesJudith Hine / Ayuko Siegel vs Milou Lee / Terry Meng7-5, 4-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesSandy Mandel vs Kelly Paulus0-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesSandy Mandel vs Minnie Ingersoll0-6, 1-6
L#1 SinglesSandy Mandel vs Kelly Paulus6-3, 2-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesGail Gerbode / Nadine Ono vs Terry Meng / Shannon Koeppen3-6, 2-6
W#1 DoublesAyuko Siegel / DENISE GICK vs Milou Lee / Leslie Levy6-1, 4-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesSandy Mandel vs Shannon Koeppen6-4, 3-6, 0-1
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 SGV - 3.5 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 3.19 estimated across 10 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.

3.59
Christine Russell
published 3.5
3.38
Teri McClure
published
3.36
Holly Wolfle Hall
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.26
Helle Hegelund
published 3.5
3.18
Sandy Mandel
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.17
Ayuko Siegel
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.07
Pamela Girard
published
3.07
Gail Gerbode
published 3.5
2.94
Maryann Brandon
published 3.5
2.86
Nadine Ono
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
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.

Maryann Brandon + Ayuko Siegel5654% 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.

3.5
Christine Russell
51W–20L career · no lines in 2025
<1%24%76%
3.59
Teri McClure
15W–12L career · no lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.38
3.5
Holly Wolfle Hall
67W–75L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%85%14%
3.36
3.5
Helle Hegelund
8W–19L career · type A · no lines in 2025
2%95%3%
3.26
3.5
Sandy Mandel
70W–85L career · 5 lines in 2025
9%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Ayuko Siegel
64W–57L career · 3 lines in 2025
10%90%1%
3.17
Pamela Girard
1W–5L career · no lines in 2025
30%70%<1%
3.07
3.5
Gail Gerbode
3W–5L career · no lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.07
3.5
Maryann Brandon
94W–139L career · type A · no lines in 2025
67%33%<1%
2.94
3
Nadine Ono
45W–58L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%85%15%
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.