Teams

Bake-LLW-Tennis Collective Plus

2025 Adult 40 & Over - Bakersfield · Women's 3.0 - Bake

12 players · average NTRP 3.00 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-02-23vs Bake - Volley GirlsWon 31
W#1 DoublesALEXANDRA MENDOZA / Cindy Douglass vs Marcy Polley / Jessica Smith7-5, 6-2
W#1 SinglesGrace Lyn Pangaldan vs Brenda Kettler6-3, 6-0
L#2 DoublesSUZANNE TEVELDE / Rhea Barrett vs Rachel Friesen / Eloise Walker6-7, 6-3, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJasmin Batiste / Agnes Hadraki vs Ann Wisham / Andrea Woroch6-0, 6-0
2025-01-12vs Bake - Volley GirlsLost 13
L#1 DoublesTrellis Green / Chelsea Ashcraft vs Brenda Kettler / Stacy DeVries1-6, 0-6
L#1 SinglesKari Underwood vs Mia Lagunda2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesSheryl Idica Ocampo / ALEXANDRA MENDOZA vs Rachel Friesen / Eloise Walker4-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesGrace Lyn Pangaldan / Tanya Mussatto vs Shannon Boren / Marcy Polley6-4, 6-3
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's 3.0 - Bake 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 2.66 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.

3.25
Jasmin Batiste
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.92
SUZANNE TEVELDE
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.78
Grace Lyn Pangaldan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
Agnes Hadraki
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Chelsea Ashcraft
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.68
ALEXANDRA MENDOZA
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.68
Tanya Mussatto
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.67
Sheryl Idica Ocampo
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.63
Rhea Barrett
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.49
Cindy Douglass
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.28
Kari Underwood
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.27
Trellis Green
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

SUZANNE TEVELDE + Sheryl Idica Ocampo5650% games+4.1% vs expected
Grace Lyn Pangaldan + Jasmin Batiste303 matchesnot enough data
Grace Lyn Pangaldan + Tanya Mussatto123 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.

Jasmin Batiste
23W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%4%96%
3.25
SUZANNE TEVELDE
12W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%71%29%
2.92
Grace Lyn Pangaldan
9W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
2.78
3
Agnes Hadraki
1W–0L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
3
Chelsea Ashcraft
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
3
ALEXANDRA MENDOZA
4W–2L career · 2 lines in 2025
10%89%1%
2.68
Tanya Mussatto
4W–16L career · 1 line in 2025
10%89%1%
2.68
Sheryl Idica Ocampo
6W–12L career · 1 line in 2025
11%88%1%
2.67
Rhea Barrett
4W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
17%83%<1%
2.63
3
Cindy Douglass
2W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
53%47%<1%
2.49
Kari Underwood
0W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
95%5%<1%
2.28
Trellis Green
0W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
95%5%<1%
2.27

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.