Teams

GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.0-4.0W/Garcia

SouthernNewMexico · 2025 TRI-LEVEL LEAGUE

12 players · average NTRP 3.17 / GEPTA

View scouting list →
Schedule
Flight standings8 teams · 2025 TRI-LEVEL LEAGUE
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.0-4.0W/Colbert5214715175
2GEPTA/Cartwright/Trilevel/4.0-3.0W5214719191
3GEPTA/Tri-level/3.0-4.0W/Castaneda5212922176
4GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.0-4.0W/Molina4314716146
5GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.0-4.0W/Gabalindo43111023185
6GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.0-4.0W/Woo4391231222
7GEPTA/Tri-level/3.0-4.0W/Huft1651634228
8GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.0-4.0W/Garcia0751636235

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 2.68 estimated across 3 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.

3.08
Edith Hernandez
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
2.52
Cecilia Marquez
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 19% · published 3
2.44
Eufemia Garcia
usually #3 Doubles 59%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published 3
Jassivy Hernandez
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Kati Hunyadi
usually #1 Doubles 39%, also #2 Doubles 34% · published
Lizeth Alejandra Torres Castaneda
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published
Martha Platt
usually #1 Doubles 47%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Monica Morga
usually #1 Doubles 54%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Rebecca Loweree
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Roshelly Paliza
usually #1 Singles 30%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published
Selena Solis
usually #1 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Yazmin Pineda
usually #2 Doubles 34%, also #1 Doubles 34% · 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.

Monica Morga + Rebecca Loweree101150% games+1.1% vs expected
Yazmin Pineda + Jassivy Hernandez11559% gamesnot enough data
Eufemia Garcia + Cecilia Marquez7456% gamesnot enough data
Eufemia Garcia + Jassivy Hernandez1634% gamesnot enough data
Eufemia Garcia + Kati Hunyadi1433% gamesnot enough data
Kati Hunyadi + Yazmin Pineda1435% gamesnot enough data
Kati Hunyadi + Jassivy Hernandez134 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
Edith Hernandez
7W–16L career · 8 lines in 2025
28%72%<1%
3.08
3
Cecilia Marquez
66W–57L career · 15 lines in 2025
42%58%<1%
2.52
3
Eufemia Garcia
81W–124L career · type A · 32 lines in 2025
68%32%<1%
2.44
Jassivy Hernandez
55W–41L career · 39 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kati Hunyadi
74W–65L career · 41 lines in 2025
not enough data
Lizeth Alejandra Torres Castaneda
23W–21L career · 14 lines in 2025
not enough data
Martha Platt
18W–53L career · 17 lines in 2025
not enough data
Monica Morga
70W–73L career · 24 lines in 2025
not enough data
Rebecca Loweree
57W–51L career · 9 lines in 2025
not enough data
Roshelly Paliza
21W–31L career · 19 lines in 2025
not enough data
Selena Solis
96W–102L career · 12 lines in 2025
not enough data
Yazmin Pineda
42W–36L career · 34 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.