Teams

MAR JCC (Raviv)

2026 MIAMIDADE Social South Florida Women's Double Tennis L · North Miami

10 players · average NTRP 3.50 / REGION_8

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 →
Schedule7 played
2026-02-24vs San SouciWon 10
W#1 Female DoublesDenisse Bassan / Esther Garazi vs Lindsay Pumpa / Arlys Raymond6-0, 6-3
2026-02-03vs Miami Shores (Grosman)Lost 01
L#1 Female DoublesDenisse Bassan / Esther Garazi vs TIFFANY Heckler / Karen Benett6-2, 4-6, 0-1
2026-01-27Lost 01
L#1 Female DoublesAlexandra Gohari / Denisse Bassan vs Alissa Weitz / Amanda Muson2-6, 3-6
2025-12-02Won 10
W#1 Female DoublesDenisse Bassan / Esther Garazi vs Maru Winckelmann / Beth Kofsky4-6, 7-5, 1-0
2025-11-04vs Williams Island 2Lost 01
L#1 Female DoublesDenisse Bassan / Esther Garazi vs Danielle Rose Lagowitz / Bruna Tellini Vontobel1-6, 6-1, 0-1
2025-10-21Won 10
W#2 Female DoublesDenisse Bassan / Alexandra Gohari vs Rashel Benacerraf / Wendy Fritz6-4, 6-2
2025-10-07vs Miami Shores (Grosman)Won 10
W#2 Female DoublesEsther Garazi / Denisse Bassan vs Adriana Santos / Paula Barth3-6, 6-4, 1-0
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 standings6 teams · North Miami
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Miami Shores (Grosman)10042821255
2Williams Island 173321842365
3San Souci64252557446
4Williams Island 255242657421
5MAR JCC (Raviv)1893675469
6Quayside09133271468

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 3.19 estimated across 9 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.

3.63
Denisse Bassan
usually #1 Female Doubles 71%, also #2 Female Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.52
Esther Garazi
usually #1 Female Doubles 80%, also #2 Female Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.43
Rachel Mayer
published 3.5
3.33
Amanda Bender
published 3.5
3.18
Alison Friedman
published 3.5
3.07
Wendy Winograd
published
3.06
IRENE de la CRUZ
published
2.92
Tali Grynberg
published
2.57
Moran Tzaban Cohen
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.

Esther Garazi + Denisse Bassan9559% games+13.9% vs expected
Esther Garazi + Rachel Mayer19854% games−1.4% vs expected
Denisse Bassan + Rachel Mayer404 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
Denisse Bassan
63W–26L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%19%81%
3.63
3.5
Esther Garazi
45W–28L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%44%56%
3.52
3.5
Rachel Mayer
38W–13L career · type A · no lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
3.43
3.5
Amanda Bender
14W–7L career · no lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Alison Friedman
7W–14L career · no lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.18
Wendy Winograd
2W–3L career · no lines in 2026
32%68%<1%
3.07
IRENE de la CRUZ
4W–9L career · no lines in 2026
33%67%<1%
3.06
Tali Grynberg
3W–8L career · no lines in 2026
72%28%<1%
2.92
Moran Tzaban Cohen
0W–11L career · no lines in 2026
>99%<1%<1%
2.57
Leona Blustein Binnfeld
41W–7L career · no lines in 2026
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.