Teams

OC The Huntington Club - Jo 10:30

2023 SCTA Doubles 18 & Over - OC · OC Women WD - 4.0

12 players · average NTRP 4.00 / 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 →
Schedule4 played
W#2 DoublesLaurette Jennings / Lacey Seward vs Susan Umans / Arison Hong7-6, 3-6, 1-0
2023-11-03Lost 01
L#3 DoublesMary Amen / Lacey Seward vs Maureen Hensley / Denise Banks3-6, 3-6
2023-09-29vs OC NBTC - DonnaLost 01
L#3 DoublesJosephine Garrett / Lacey Seward vs Jodie McCollum / Diane Rettew4-6, 2-6
2023-09-21vs OC Lifetime SC - MerwinWon 10
W#3 DoublesLacey Seward / Nikki Smith vs Renate Snow-Poe / Christine Reenders4-6, 6-2, 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 standings for OC Women WD - 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 3.53 estimated across 10 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.

4.15
Emalyn Anthony
usually #1 Doubles 58%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
Christine Callas
published 4
3.70
Ida Shu
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 36% · published 4
3.66
Kelly Lombardo
published
3.64
Cheryl Gates
published 4
3.52
Rosalinda Fazio
usually #3 Doubles 35%, also #1 Doubles 35% · published 4
3.44
Lacey Seward
usually #1 Doubles 58%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.37
Lisa Rhoads
published
3.33
Janna McConnell
published
3.29
Mary Read
published
3.22
Josephine Garrett
published
Mary Amen
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.

Cheryl Gates + Janna McConnell3548% games+9.3% vs expected
Emalyn Anthony + Ida Shu3351% gamesnot enough data
Josephine Garrett + Kelly Lombardo044 matchesnot enough data
Rosalinda Fazio + Ida Shu123 matchesnot enough data
Rosalinda Fazio + Lacey Seward123 matchesnot enough data
Ida Shu + Lacey Seward213 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.

4.5
Emalyn Anthony
106W–57L career · 12 lines in 2023
14%86%1%
4.15
4
Christine Callas
2W–0L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Ida Shu
61W–66L career · 11 lines in 2023
7%91%2%
3.70
Kelly Lombardo
0W–4L career · no lines in 2023
13%86%1%
3.66
4
Cheryl Gates
16W–12L career · no lines in 2023
16%83%<1%
3.64
4
Rosalinda Fazio
96W–130L career · 17 lines in 2023
45%55%<1%
3.52
3.5
Lacey Seward
95W–61L career · 12 lines in 2023
<1%65%34%
3.44
Lisa Rhoads
7W–2L career · no lines in 2023
<1%<1%>99%
3.37
Janna McConnell
8W–9L career · no lines in 2023
<1%1%99%
3.33
Mary Read
1W–4L career · no lines in 2023
<1%2%98%
3.29
Josephine Garrett
7W–19L career · no lines in 2023
<1%6%94%
3.22
Mary Amen
0W–1L career · no lines in 2023
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.