Teams

Zap

2022 San Angelo Tri-Level League · Tri-level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.58 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2022-11-07vs Briley/RossWon 10
W#2 DoublesAmy Hill / Mitzi Salgado vs Archana Rao / Hallye Phillips6-3, 6-1
2022-10-24vs BrightLost 01
L#2 DoublesAmy Hill / Natalie Bryan vs Lara Coleman / Sarah Post6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-10-10vs GravelleWon 10
W#2 DoublesAmy Hill / Mitzi Salgado vs Lorie Balderas / Lori Dornhecker6-2, 6-2
2022-10-03vs Edmiston/StewartLost 01
L#2 DoublesAmy Hill / Natalie Bryan vs Lexanne Edmiston / Jessie Hoak4-6, 7-5, 0-1
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 Tri-level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Women 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 3.15 estimated across 8 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.

3.74
Deborah Simons
published 4
3.60
Deanne Hume
published 4
3.48
Debra Melott
published 4
3.31
Amy Hill
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.83
CoCo Simpson
published 3
2.77
MonaLisa Fischer
published
2.58
Julie Manuel
published
Mitzi Salgado
published
Sylvia Zap
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.

MonaLisa Fischer + CoCo Simpson2348% games+9.0% vs expected
Sylvia Zap + Julie Manuel3447% games+4.3% vs expected
Deanne Hume + Deborah Simons261159% games+0.3% vs expected
MonaLisa Fischer + Catherine Cuenca-Torres2452% gamesnot enough data
Sylvia Zap + Catherine Cuenca-Torres224 matchesnot enough data
CoCo Simpson + Mitzi Salgado134 matchesnot enough data
Debra Melott + Deborah Simons213 matchesnot enough data
MonaLisa Fischer + Julie Manuel123 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
Deborah Simons
46W–20L career · no lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.74
4
Deanne Hume
31W–18L career · no lines in 2022
22%78%<1%
3.60
4
Debra Melott
36W–27L career · no lines in 2022
56%44%<1%
3.48
3.5
Amy Hill
122W–85L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%92%7%
3.31
3
Catherine Cuenca-Torres
26W–51L career · no lines in 2022
<1%84%15%
2.87
3
CoCo Simpson
23W–42L career · no lines in 2022
1%90%9%
2.83
MonaLisa Fischer
14W–54L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.77
Julie Manuel
27W–65L career · no lines in 2022
28%72%<1%
2.58
Mitzi Salgado
48W–28L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Sylvia Zap
27W–54L 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.