Teams

Sipe-VAC Spin City 2025

2025 One Doubles-Summer · 3.5 Women

4 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-08-07vs Tan/Ivester-HeckTanPaiSterCadYenLost 01
L#1 DoublesChristina Sipe / Catherine Goerig vs Jennifer Ivester / Melissa Heckman1-6, 2-6
2025-07-22vs Hulburt-Nice Ace!Lost 01
L#1 DoublesChristina Sipe / Catherine Goerig vs Megan Dempsey / Tamara Rosenbloom1-6, 1-6
2025-07-16vs Dixon/Lewis-Bring Jo’ BeshLost 01
L#1 DoublesChristina Sipe / Catherine Goerig vs Beshka Lewis / Joelle Dixon1-6, 2-6
2025-07-11vs SteuartLost 01
L#1 DoublesChristina Sipe / Lisa Manzer vs Rosa Allen / Morgann Crook1-6, 2-6
2025-07-08vs Chan-Flying Eagles 3.5Won 10
W#1 DoublesLisa Manzer / Christina Sipe vs Diana Chan / Loretta Gohd2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-07-02vs SeeleyLost 01
L#1 DoublesNattarudee Palalikit / Catherine Goerig vs Jullie Seeley / Lauren Hamilton6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2025-06-17vs Norris/GanoLost 01
L#1 DoublesChristina Sipe / Nattarudee Palalikit vs Angela Gano / Alexandrea Norris4-6, 3-6
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 standings18 teams · 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Dixon/Lewis-Bring Jo’ Besh8080251
2Manke/Corddry-Fab 57171343
3SWW-Ohagan7171563
4Dizon/Saul-Doubles Vision Summer6262660
5Hulburt-Nice Ace!6262758
6Norris/Gano5353666
7Steuart5353880
8Fuller/Stambuk-Syncopated Shots4444874
9Tan/Ivester-HeckTanPaiSterCadYen4444965
10Neeley3535972
11Waldman-Untouchaballs35351170
12Stevenson-GTC 3.535351182
13VanPaepeghem/Fourtner-Double Trouble35351284
14Herrick-Redemption Tour26261378
15Seeley26261490
16Chan-Flying Eagles 3.526261490
17Strueby/Srein-S & S Swingers17171493
18Sipe-VAC Spin City 202517171591

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 3.23 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.

3.28
Christina Sipe
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.22
Catherine Goerig
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.20
Nattarudee Palalikit
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Lisa Manzer
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.

Nattarudee Palalikit + Christina Sipe7645% games−3.4% vs expected
Catherine Goerig + Christina Sipe1637% games−6.8% vs expected
Lisa Manzer + Christina Sipe123 matchesnot enough data
Catherine Goerig + Nattarudee Palalikit213 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
Christina Sipe
85W–79L career · type A · 6 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.28
3.5
Catherine Goerig
78W–40L career · 4 lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Nattarudee Palalikit
58W–37L career · 2 lines in 2025
8%91%2%
3.20
Lisa Manzer
14W–11L career · 2 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.