Teams

BC-MCC/MikeYogi

2021 TRI LEVEL MIXED Spring - BC LOCAL LEAGUE · BC - TRI LEVEL MIXED Spring 3.0 - 3.5 - 4.0

20 players · average NTRP 3.79 / SO.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 →
Schedule1 played
2021-04-09vs BC-AltaVista/JinWenLost 01
L#1 DoublesJeffrey Alder / Frances Hong vs Riho Nakano / Mattias Tornyi7-5, 2-6, 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 BC - TRI LEVEL MIXED Spring 3.0 - 3.5 - 4.0 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 3.52 estimated across 14 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.

4.26
David Chang
published 4
4.09
Drisa Carrizo
published 4.5
3.75
Leasa Ireland
published
Jeffrey Alder
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.73
Serene Peterson
published
3.73
Sonja Harrington
published
3.67
Jeanette Chun
published
3.65
Frances Hong
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.44
Michael Stillman
published
3.42
Steven Tornicelli
published
3.35
KEVIN QUIGLEY
published
3.27
Sandy Quigley
published
Irina Goedemans
published 3.5
3.12
Aubrey Sedberry
published 3.5
2.89
Bob Nicholson
published 3
2.87
Jeff Goldman
published
Mike Yogi
published
Sung Chun
published
Tina Wu
published
Tony Arora
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.

Tina Wu + David Chang123 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.

4
David Chang
2W–4L career · no lines in 2021
<1%2%98%
4.26
4.5
Drisa Carrizo
23W–23L career · no lines in 2021
23%77%<1%
4.09
Leasa Ireland
7W–7L career · no lines in 2021
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Jeffrey Alder
28W–17L career · 1 line in 2021
not enough data
Serene Peterson
8W–9L career · no lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.73
Sonja Harrington
6W–9L career · no lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.73
Jeanette Chun
6W–5L career · no lines in 2021
10%90%1%
3.67
4
Frances Hong
74W–93L career · 1 line in 2021
13%86%<1%
3.65
Michael Stillman
16W–13L career · no lines in 2021
<1%67%33%
3.44
Steven Tornicelli
4W–2L career · no lines in 2021
<1%74%26%
3.42
KEVIN QUIGLEY
3W–1L career · no lines in 2021
<1%87%13%
3.35
Sandy Quigley
4W–7L career · no lines in 2021
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Irina Goedemans
1W–3L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
3.5
Aubrey Sedberry
4W–5L career · no lines in 2021
17%82%<1%
3.12
3
Bob Nicholson
6W–1L career · no lines in 2021
<1%81%19%
2.89
Jeff Goldman
14W–18L career · no lines in 2021
<1%83%17%
2.87
Mike Yogi
0W–3L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Sung Chun
1W–0L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Tina Wu
1W–2L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Tony Arora
1W–1L career · no lines in 2021
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.