Teams

SD 3.5WD Balboa Alley Cats (3:2)/ Mallory

2025 Adult 18 & Over Spring - SD WD · SD - Women - 3.5

17 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SAN DIEGO

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-05-20vs SD 3.5WD Coronado TC (2:3)/ WestSplit 11
W#2 SinglesCaitlin Frazer vs Tara Toohey6-0, 7-5
L#3 DoublesLinda Olson / Peggy Cuppy vs Jill Lehr / Megan West3-6, 1-6
2025-05-13vs WC SD WD 3.5 Peninsula TC/ WilkinsonSplit 11
L#2 SinglesElizabeth Estevane vs Meg Hagan0-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesLinda Olson / Caitlin Frazer vs Shelly Patriquin / Sonia Peterson6-0, 7-6
2025-05-06vs SD 3.5WD Mtn View (3:2)/ FigueroaSplit 11
W#2 DoublesAnna Brigham / HELEN LARSONGARCIA vs Maria Patino / Carla Kyriakides7-6, 6-0
L#3 DoublesDiane Edge / Dinah Mattozzi vs Maria Salas Kazmi / Noelia Figueroa3-6, 1-6
2025-04-29vs SD 3.5WD SDTRC (3:2)/ AdamsLost 12
L#1 DoublesMer Chiodo / Elizabeth Estevane vs Heather Ravenscroft / Lisa Shirley3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesPeggy Cuppy / Diane Edge vs Michelle Adams / Erin Smith2-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesAnna Brigham / Whitney Johnson vs Tania Lancaster / Kate Gill6-4, 6-1
2025-04-22vs SD 3.5WD La Jolla TC (3:2)/ BrunoLost 12
L#1 DoublesLisa Mallory / Jacinthe Pare vs Jessica Shehab / Carolyn Pringle6-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesCarol Morris / Dinah Mattozzi vs Sarah Bruno / Alison Burkett2-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesLinda Olson / Caitlin Frazer vs Christina George-Bill / Paige Kratz6-3, 6-1
2025-04-15vs SD 3.5WD Mtn View (3:2)/ PadillaWon 21
L#2 DoublesMer Chiodo / Anna Brigham vs Alejandra Brizuela / Herta Ixtlahuac0-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesElizabeth Estevane vs Cynthia Hensersky6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesPeggy Cuppy / Cindy Chu vs Fernanda LAZO / Dora Rosas6-3, 6-2
2025-04-08vs SD 3.5WD SDTRC (3:2)/ MonzonWon 20
W#1 DoublesJacinthe Pare / Tori Penick vs Kristan Hanson / Kelly Wilson4-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#1 SinglesCaitlin Frazer vs Sandra Angel6-4, 6-1
W#1 DoublesLisa Mallory / Jacinthe Pare vs Carolina Carreno / Pam Trent6-4, 5-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesDinah Mattozzi / Lisa Hunter vs Suzi Launey / Susan Schraeder6-1, 6-3
W#2 SinglesElizabeth Estevane vs Malinda Marsh7-5, 6-3
W#3 DoublesCaitlin Frazer / Mer Chiodo vs Janet Bergland / Cathy Swindlehurst6-4, 6-4
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 SD - Women - 3.5 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 3.28 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.

3.64
Whitney Johnson
published
3.50
Cindy Chu
published 3.5
3.48
Caitlin Frazer
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published 3.5
3.36
Jacinthe Pare
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.35
Diane Edge
published 3.5
3.33
HELEN LARSONGARCIA
published
3.30
Elizabeth Estevane
usually #2 Singles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.28
Tori Penick
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.24
Peggy Cuppy
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.24
Anna Brigham
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.22
Mer Chiodo
published
3.16
Dinah Mattozzi
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.99
Carol Morris
published 3.5
2.83
Jennifer Neivert
published
Linda Olson
published
Lisa Hunter
published
Ruby Gardner
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.

Peggy Cuppy + Jacinthe Pare9256% games+6.1% vs expected
Anna Brigham + Tori Penick4549% games+1.7% vs expected
Jacinthe Pare + Tori Penick9850% games−6.3% vs expected
Peggy Cuppy + Anna Brigham6950% gamesnot enough data
Jacinthe Pare + Anna Brigham4250% gamesnot enough data
Dinah Mattozzi + Peggy Cuppy213 matchesnot enough data
Whitney Johnson + Diane Edge123 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.

Whitney Johnson
6W–11L career · no lines in 2025
<1%<1%>99%
3.64
3.5
Cindy Chu
9W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%49%51%
3.50
3.5
Caitlin Frazer
61W–18L career · 10 lines in 2025
<1%56%44%
3.48
3.5
Jacinthe Pare
67W–36L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%84%15%
3.36
3.5
Diane Edge
9W–11L career · no lines in 2025
1%86%14%
3.35
HELEN LARSONGARCIA
0W–5L career · no lines in 2025
89%11%<1%
3.33
3.5
Elizabeth Estevane
50W–48L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%91%8%
3.30
3.5
Tori Penick
49W–34L career · 1 line in 2025
2%92%6%
3.28
3.5
Peggy Cuppy
42W–51L career · 3 lines in 2025
4%93%3%
3.24
3.5
Anna Brigham
56W–50L career · 3 lines in 2025
4%92%3%
3.24
Mer Chiodo
2W–2L career · no lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Dinah Mattozzi
30W–33L career · 3 lines in 2025
13%86%1%
3.16
3.5
Carol Morris
6W–4L career · no lines in 2025
54%46%<1%
2.99
Jennifer Neivert
9W–18L career · no lines in 2025
1%88%11%
2.83
Linda Olson
1W–0L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Lisa Hunter
1W–5L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Ruby Gardner
4W–2L 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.