Teams

SGV Freemont Four Fives-Mazin-Freemont Park-SA 12

2022 Adult Division - 40& Over San Gabriel Valley · SGV - Women 4.5

16 players · average NTRP 4.15 / 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 SGV - Women 4.5 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 3.93 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.

4.44
Yuri Nichelson
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.35
Tai Sisson
published 4.5
4.30
April Hartstein
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.15
Jennifer Avila
published
4.07
Michelle L Hughes
published
3.87
Wenli Chen
published
3.86
Stephanie Perry
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 36% · published 4
3.85
Debbie Sierra
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.79
Adrienne Beauvois
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.77
Penapa Frick
published
3.74
Melissa Mazin
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.70
Lorna Kim
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.69
Cindi Carter
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.49
Kristin McQueen
usually #1 Doubles 64%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published 4
Julie Juliani
published
Linda Park
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.

Lorna Kim + Stephanie Perry8652% games+10.6% vs expected
Melissa Mazin + Penapa Frick4255% games+4.2% vs expected
Debbie Sierra + Cindi Carter3647% games+0.4% vs expected
Lorna Kim + Debbie Sierra41044% games+0.4% vs expected
Stephanie Perry + Cindi Carter8752% games−2.0% vs expected
Lorna Kim + Kristin McQueen141252% games−2.8% vs expected
Melissa Mazin + Cindi Carter8753% games−7.9% vs expected
Kristin McQueen + Cindi Carter141252% gamesnot 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.

4.5
Yuri Nichelson
207W–73L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%67%33%
4.44
4.5
Tai Sisson
249W–74L career · no lines in 2022
<1%87%13%
4.35
4.5
April Hartstein
227W–139L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
4.30
Jennifer Avila
8W–3L career · no lines in 2022
12%88%<1%
4.15
Michelle L Hughes
2W–2L career · no lines in 2022
>99%<1%<1%
4.07
Wenli Chen
5W–10L career · no lines in 2022
85%15%<1%
3.87
4
Stephanie Perry
184W–106L career · 11 lines in 2022
<1%85%15%
3.86
4
Debbie Sierra
34W–45L career · type A · 5 lines in 2022
<1%88%12%
3.85
4
Adrienne Beauvois
152W–120L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%93%5%
3.79
Penapa Frick
12W–10L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Melissa Mazin
52W–64L career · 5 lines in 2022
3%95%2%
3.74
4
Lorna Kim
210W–162L career · 6 lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.70
4
Cindi Carter
150W–114L career · 7 lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Kristin McQueen
208W–189L career · 11 lines in 2022
53%47%<1%
3.49
Julie Juliani
4W–4L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Linda Park
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
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.