Teams

MILLS COLLEGE 18AW4.5B

2024 ADULT 18&Over · Women's 4.5

22 players · average NTRP 4.57 / NO. 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 →

Flight standings for Women's 4.5 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 4.15 estimated across 19 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.

Bomy Hagopian
published 5
4.50
Beth Workeneh
published 4.5
4.34
Signy Judd
published
4.31
Jennifer Mills
published
4.28
Kira Deguchi
published
4.27
4.24
Seena Shanker
published
4.24
Dana Greason
published 4.5
4.22
Amy Rennert
published 4.5
4.20
Leone Patterson
published
4.17
Sally Cella
published
4.16
Heather Lobdell
published 4.5
4.15
Jamille Lee
published 4.5
4.11
Noriko Swanson
published
4.10
Kimberly Prast
published
3.99
Lisa Trusheim
published
3.97
Sonnet McKinnon
published
3.95
Marina Wills
published
3.89
Leigh Pagan
published
3.68
Molly Neal
published
Tendo Gwaze
published
Vinka Makris
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.

Seena Shanker + Jamille Lee6061% games+1.7% vs expected
Dana Greason + Beth Workeneh314 matchesnot enough data
Seena Shanker + Leone Patterson224 matchesnot enough data
Amy Rennert + Leigh Pagan213 matchesnot enough data
Amy Rennert + Sonnet McKinnon303 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.

5
Bomy Hagopian
0W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
4.5
Beth Workeneh
7W–1L career · no lines in 2024
<1%48%52%
4.50
Signy Judd
4W–6L career · no lines in 2024
89%11%<1%
4.34
Jennifer Mills
16W–7L career · no lines in 2024
1%92%7%
4.31
Kira Deguchi
0W–13L career · no lines in 2024
96%4%<1%
4.28
4.5
Christine Costamagna
10W–4L career · no lines in 2024
2%94%4%
4.27
Seena Shanker
17W–3L career · no lines in 2024
3%95%2%
4.24
4.5
Dana Greason
9W–8L career · no lines in 2024
4%94%2%
4.24
4.5
Amy Rennert
9W–3L career · no lines in 2024
4%94%2%
4.22
Leone Patterson
22W–12L career · no lines in 2024
7%92%1%
4.20
Sally Cella
12W–8L career · no lines in 2024
10%90%1%
4.17
4.5
Heather Lobdell
5W–3L career · no lines in 2024
11%89%<1%
4.16
4.5
Jamille Lee
17W–7L career · no lines in 2024
12%87%<1%
4.15
Noriko Swanson
15W–11L career · no lines in 2024
20%80%<1%
4.11
Kimberly Prast
4W–5L career · no lines in 2024
22%78%<1%
4.10
Lisa Trusheim
13W–10L career · no lines in 2024
54%46%<1%
3.99
Sonnet McKinnon
7W–5L career · no lines in 2024
60%40%<1%
3.97
Marina Wills
9W–15L career · no lines in 2024
65%35%<1%
3.95
Leigh Pagan
17W–8L career · no lines in 2024
81%19%<1%
3.89
Molly Neal
22W–9L career · no lines in 2024
99%1%<1%
3.68
Tendo Gwaze
1W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Vinka Makris
0W–1L career · no lines in 2024
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.