Teams

Avila Daymude Tri-Level

Tri-Level Doubles18 & Over · CC Tri-Level W 3.0

12 players · average NTRP 3.67 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2022-11-12vs CC-LLW-SMCC-HaskellLost 01
L#1 DoublesJanet Holland / Michelle Adam vs Darcia Stebbens / Cathy Robeck1-6, 2-6
2022-10-22vs CC-LLW-SMCC-HaskellLost 01
L#1 DoublesJanet Holland / Michelle Adam vs Darcia Stebbens / Daisy Carlson6-4, 4-6, 0-1
2022-10-01vs CC-LLW-SMCC-HaskellLost 01
L#1 DoublesMichelle Adam / Karen Gordon vs Daisy Carlson / Julie Slider2-6, 3-6
2022-09-11vs CC-LLW-SMCC-HaskellLost 01
L#1 DoublesMichelle Adam / Janet Holland vs Darcia Stebbens / Cathy Robeck4-6, 4-6
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 Tri-Level W 3.0 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 3.33 estimated across 11 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.

3.79
Shannon Dossa
published
3.59
Michelle Adam
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.58
Jiao Hua Zhou
published
3.53
Patty Lopez
published
3.29
Karen Gordon
published
3.29
Deborah VANDENBERG
published 3.5
3.21
Janet Holland
published
3.17
Jayne Engle Allen
published
3.13
Deborah Cherry
published 3.5
3.10
Ramona Friedman
published
2.99
Susan Daymude
published
Kelley Munson
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.

Jiao Hua Zhou + Shannon Dossa4261% games+2.1% vs expected
Deborah Cherry + Janet Holland4354% games+1.4% vs expected
Karen Gordon + Deborah VANDENBERG4346% games−0.3% vs expected
Karen Gordon + Kelley Munson1441% games−9.4% vs expected
Karen Gordon + Shannon Dossa123 matchesnot enough data
Deborah VANDENBERG + Shannon Dossa213 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.

Shannon Dossa
35W–31L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.79
4
Michelle Adam
67W–62L career · 4 lines in 2022
24%76%<1%
3.59
Jiao Hua Zhou
20W–9L career · no lines in 2022
28%72%<1%
3.58
Patty Lopez
4W–5L career · no lines in 2022
41%59%<1%
3.53
Karen Gordon
28W–28L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Deborah VANDENBERG
24W–14L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.29
Janet Holland
8W–5L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.21
Jayne Engle Allen
9W–9L career · no lines in 2022
10%89%<1%
3.17
3.5
Deborah Cherry
12W–13L career · no lines in 2022
16%84%<1%
3.13
Ramona Friedman
1W–12L career · no lines in 2022
21%79%<1%
3.10
Susan Daymude
6W–8L career · no lines in 2022
54%46%<1%
2.99
Kelley Munson
23W–7L 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.