Teams

CC TTR Batistic

2025 USTA CC Fall SoCal Doubles 18 & OVER · CC 3.5W 18 & OVER

10 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
2025-12-20vs CC SMCC Meals 3.5WLost 03
L#1 DoublesZoya Dixon / Darla Batistic vs Colleen Thompson / ISABEL FRAZIER2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesFrancie Kelley / Fabiola Van Oppen vs Yvonne Miller / Lorena Torres1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesJoan Jordan / Jennie Williams vs Audrey Weil / Aryn Jorgensen1-6, 3-6
2025-12-13vs CC - LLW - Avila Fireballs 3.5WLost 12
L#1 DoublesSandra Mcbeth / Darla Batistic vs Shannon Dossa / Karen Gordon5-7, 4-6
L#2 DoublesZoya Dixon / Fabiola Van Oppen vs Jessica Blackburn / Lori Sherry1-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesFrancie Kelley / Anne Stegall vs Paula Olson / Bonnie Lynam6-2, 6-4
2025-12-01vs CC SLOCC Bodnar 3.5WLost 03
L#1 DoublesSandra Mcbeth / Zoya Dixon vs Tami Rose / Stephanie Ventura6-2, 5-7, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJennie Williams / Carolyn Lochhead vs Dede Bodnar / Sarah Pedersen1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesFrancie Kelley / Fabiola Van Oppen vs Edith Martin / Jean Kennedy2-6, 3-6
2025-11-23vs CC SLOCC Hicks 3.5WLost 12
W#1 DoublesCarolyn Lochhead / Zoya Dixon vs Camila Strong / Genevieve Arjal6-3, 6-7, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSandra Mcbeth / Darla Batistic vs Abrianna Rose / Sarah Krueckel2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesJennie Williams / Fabiola Van Oppen vs Melissa Allen / Jami Wozniak2-6, 3-6
2025-11-08vs CC - LLW - Avila Fireballs 3.5WLost 03
L#1 DoublesLibby Kerr / Sandra Mcbeth vs Karen Gordon / Deborah VANDENBERG4-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJoan Jordan / Anne Stegall vs Brooke Barber / Lori Bickel6-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesDarla Batistic / Natalie Ziegler vs Bonnie Lynam / Jessica Blackburn4-6, 2-6
2025-11-02vs CC SLOCC Hicks 3.5WLost 03
L#1 DoublesZoya Dixon / Sandra Mcbeth vs Ellyn Billingsley / Sarah Krueckel6-2, 5-7, 0-1
L#2 DoublesFrancie Kelley / Carolyn Lochhead vs Jenna Hicks / Abrianna Rose1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesFabiola Van Oppen / Natalie Ziegler vs Melissa Allen / Jami Wozniak4-6, 2-6
2025-10-25vs CC SMCC Meals 3.5WLost 12
L#1 DoublesJoan Jordan / Carolyn Lochhead vs Danielle Chanley / Corrie Meals4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesSandra Mcbeth / Francie Kelley vs Aryn Jorgensen / Yvonne Miller4-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesDarla Batistic / Natalie Ziegler vs Ramona Cabiles / Lorena Torres5-7, 6-7
2025-10-10vs CC SLOCC Bodnar 3.5WLost 03
L#1 DoublesLibby Kerr / Carolyn Lochhead vs Stephanie Ventura / Sarah Pedersen4-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJoan Jordan / Jennie Williams vs Jean Kennedy / Christina Olson1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesDarla Batistic / Natalie Ziegler vs Edith Martin / Rose Ancheta3-6, 2-6
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 CC 3.5W 18 & OVER 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 3.06 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.

3.17
Anne Stegall
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.14
Sandra Mcbeth
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.13
Zoya Dixon
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.13
Joan Jordan
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.11
Francie Kelley
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
3.02
Darla Batistic
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.94
Carolyn Lochhead
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
2.84
Fabiola Van Oppen
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Libby Kerr
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Natalie Ziegler
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Darla Batistic + Sandra Mcbeth71245% games−3.7% vs expected
Joan Jordan + Francie Kelley314 matchesnot enough data
Francie Kelley + Fabiola Van Oppen044 matchesnot enough data
Carolyn Lochhead + Joan Jordan033 matchesnot enough data
Darla Batistic + Zoya Dixon123 matchesnot enough data
Darla Batistic + Natalie Ziegler033 matchesnot enough data
Zoya Dixon + Sandra Mcbeth033 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
Anne Stegall
1W–6L career · type S · 2 lines in 2025
11%88%1%
3.17
Sandra Mcbeth
9W–19L career · 6 lines in 2025
15%84%1%
3.14
Zoya Dixon
6W–11L career · 5 lines in 2025
17%83%<1%
3.13
Joan Jordan
5W–14L career · 4 lines in 2025
19%81%<1%
3.13
Francie Kelley
11W–18L career · 5 lines in 2025
21%79%<1%
3.11
3.5
Darla Batistic
8W–26L career · 6 lines in 2025
45%55%<1%
3.02
3.5
Carolyn Lochhead
3W–15L career · 5 lines in 2025
67%33%<1%
2.94
Fabiola Van Oppen
1W–17L career · 5 lines in 2025
87%13%<1%
2.84
Libby Kerr
2W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Natalie Ziegler
0W–4L career · 4 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.