Teams

BC-MCC/RachelAlexander

2025 ADULT 40 & OVER - Beach Cities · BC Women - 4.0

22 players · average NTRP 3.90 / 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 →

Flight standings for BC Women - 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 3.54 estimated across 19 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.

3.83
Angela Dax
published 4
3.81
Pamela Lopez
published
Amy Karr
published 4
3.75
Renee Tinker
published
3.72
Mariel VandenHengel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.71
Ethylene Ziegler
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.70
Linda Lai
published
3.70
Faye Cavanaugh
published 4
3.69
3.63
Ellen Lauricella
published 4
3.60
Layla Kiffin
published
3.60
Frances Nelson
published 4
3.52
Taylor Rayfield
published
3.50
Kristina Mohr
published
3.48
Erin Freeman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.39
Anne Lee
published 3.5
3.30
Annie Han
published 3.5
3.21
Kimberly Graham
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.10
Rachel Alexander
published
3.08
Teal Levine
published
Julie Tendoesschate
published
Mimi Fischer
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.

Erin Freeman + Ethylene Ziegler123 matchesnot enough data
Ethylene Ziegler + Kimberly Graham213 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
Angela Dax
6W–3L career · no lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.83
Pamela Lopez
21W–8L career · no lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.81
4
Amy Karr
1W–0L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Renee Tinker
3W–10L career · no lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.75
Mariel VandenHengel
31W–31L career · 1 line in 2025
4%94%2%
3.72
4
Ethylene Ziegler
87W–63L career · 3 lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.71
Linda Lai
6W–7L career · no lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.70
4
Faye Cavanaugh
5W–14L career · no lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.70
4
Elizabeth Alexander
6W–7L career · no lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Ellen Lauricella
2W–3L career · no lines in 2025
15%85%<1%
3.63
Layla Kiffin
5W–8L career · no lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
3.60
4
Frances Nelson
2W–3L career · no lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
3.60
Taylor Rayfield
8W–5L career · no lines in 2025
43%57%<1%
3.52
Kristina Mohr
0W–5L career · no lines in 2025
48%52%<1%
3.50
4
Erin Freeman
23W–21L career · 5 lines in 2025
55%45%<1%
3.48
3.5
Anne Lee
7W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.39
3.5
Annie Han
6W–9L career · no lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.30
Kimberly Graham
38W–35L career · 1 line in 2025
99%1%<1%
3.21
Rachel Alexander
1W–4L career · no lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
3.10
Teal Levine
4W–5L career · no lines in 2025
27%73%<1%
3.08
Julie Tendoesschate
15W–15L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Mimi Fischer
16W–19L career · no 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.