Teams

GEPTA/Quevedo/Trilevel/4.5-3.5W

SouthernNewMexico · 2025 TRI-LEVEL LEAGUE

12 players · average NTRP 4.14 / GEPTA

View scouting list →
Schedule
Flight standings5 teams · 2025 TRI-LEVEL LEAGUE
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1GEPTA/Quevedo/Trilevel/4.5-3.5W4093999
2GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.5-4.5W/Lobato318412106
3GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.5-4.5W/Chivardi135715108
4GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.5-4.5W/Calderon134818124
5GEPTA/Tri-Level/3.5-4.5W/Perches134818136

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 3.86 estimated across 6 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.

4.37
Courteney Park
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 23% · published 4.5
4.35
Alehanna Kehr- Gomez
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #3 Doubles 19% · published 4.5
Daniela Chretin
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #2 Doubles 23% · published 4.5
3.80
Cristina Munoz
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 28% · published 4
3.76
Angela de la Torre
usually #1 Singles 37%, also #2 Singles 32% · published 4
3.63
Cindy Karam
usually #3 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 32% · published 4
3.23
Berenice Loubet
usually #2 Doubles 31%, also #3 Doubles 31% · published 3.5
Marcelle Fernandez
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
Melissa Isaac
usually #1 Doubles 54%, also #2 Doubles 34% · published
Renee Isabella Quevedo
usually #1 Doubles 42%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Valeria Delgado
usually #3 Doubles 45%, also #2 Doubles 35% · published
Valerie Santos
usually #1 Doubles 35%, also #1 Singles 18% · 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.

Valerie Santos + Cristina Munoz4256% gamesnot enough data
Alehanna Kehr- Gomez + Courteney Park5066% gamesnot enough data
Renee Isabella Quevedo + Valeria Delgado303 matchesnot enough data
Cristina Munoz + Valeria Delgado303 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
Courteney Park
71W–17L career · 22 lines in 2025
<1%81%18%
4.37
4.5
Alehanna Kehr- Gomez
42W–14L career · 16 lines in 2025
1%86%14%
4.35
4.5
Daniela Chretin
28W–19L career · 13 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Cristina Munoz
33W–24L career · 23 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
3.80
4
Angela de la Torre
49W–33L career · 18 lines in 2025
3%92%5%
3.76
4
Cindy Karam
36W–24L career · 25 lines in 2025
17%83%<1%
3.63
3.5
Berenice Loubet
32W–31L career · 16 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.23
Marcelle Fernandez
25W–11L career · 11 lines in 2025
not enough data
Melissa Isaac
107W–104L career · 35 lines in 2025
not enough data
Renee Isabella Quevedo
38W–23L career · 12 lines in 2025
not enough data
Valeria Delgado
26W–13L career · 20 lines in 2025
not enough data
Valerie Santos
128W–66L career · 35 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.