Teams

LA - Sets on Fire

2024 SoCal Tri-Level - LA · LA - Women 4.5

20 players · average NTRP 4.25 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2024-09-28vs LA - Mulholland M & MsWon 10
W#3 DoublesReanne Charuhas / Tina Yang vs Ann Epstein-Cohen / Ioli Filmeridis6-1, 6-3
2024-09-21vs LA - Mulholland M & MsWon 20
W#2 DoublesTracy Dickerson / Stacy Sarner vs Schuyler Grant / Carolyn Prousky6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesBu Kum Kim / Tina Yang vs Ioli Filmeridis / Samira Sizdahkhani6-7, 6-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJennifer Foley / Becky Leibowitz vs Terri Admiraal / Tricia Kim6-4, 6-2
2024-08-27vs LA - Mulholland M & MsWon 20
W#1 DoublesMarjorie Buss / Mandi Collier vs Shanna Reznik / Karen Sarkissian6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesDenise Gocke / Julie Kanjanapangka vs Julie DeSanto / Pam Epstein-Cohen6-3, 5-7, 1-0
L#1 DoublesChloe Kishel / Kristina Chen vs Carolyn Atchison / Loretta Peng2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesJulie Kanjanapangka / Stacy Sarner vs Lauri Solano / Paula Evans6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesReanne Charuhas / Tina Yang vs Kathryn Speer / Terri Admiraal6-7, 1-6
L#1 DoublesChristine Chen / Kristina Chen vs April Hartstein / Mary Soto3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesGayle Byrne / Lara Fermanis vs Paula Evans / Lauri Solano4-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesBu Kum Kim / Janina Morrison vs Peggy Perazzo / Kathryn Speer5-7, 6-2, 1-0
2024-08-03vs LA - Mulholland M & MsWon 21
L#1 DoublesChristine Chen / Kristina Ebon vs Shanna Reznik / Karen Sarkissian3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDenise Gocke / Julie Kanjanapangka vs Julie DeSanto / Pam Epstein-Cohen6-4, 6-1
W#3 DoublesBu Kum Kim / Tina Yang vs Samira Sizdahkhani / Amelia Stephenson6-1, 2-6, 1-0
W#1 DoublesKristina Chen / Mandi Collier vs Carolyn Atchison / Julie Juliani6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesGayle Byrne / Tracy Dickerson vs Teresa Loveland / Lauri Solano6-3, 6-2
L#3 DoublesBecky Leibowitz / VICKY TRINH vs Kristine Puno / Kathryn Speer7-5, 3-6, 1-0
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 LA - Women 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 3.94 estimated across 20 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.

4.70
Mandi Collier
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 5
4.53
Kristina Ebon
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.40
Chandler Nguyen
published 4.5
4.35
Kristina Chen
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.23
Marjorie Buss
published
4.23
Christine Chen
published 4.5
4.14
Chloe Kishel
published 4.5
4.00
Stacy Sarner
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.91
Olivia Burtis
published
3.85
Ali Baird
published 4
3.84
Reanne Charuhas
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.81
VICKY TRINH
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.81
Gayle Byrne
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Lara Fermanis
published
3.69
Denise Gocke
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.64
Tracy Dickerson
published
3.61
Janina Morrison
published
3.54
Becky Leibowitz
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.50
Bu Kum Kim
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.36
Tina Yang
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.

Ali Baird + Gayle Byrne5261% games+1.1% vs expected
Kristina Chen + Christine Chen11558% games−2.9% vs expected
Stacy Sarner + Denise Gocke4256% gamesnot enough data
Kristina Chen + Mandi Collier314 matchesnot enough data
Stacy Sarner + Gayle Byrne314 matchesnot enough data
Denise Gocke + Gayle Byrne224 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
Mandi Collier
188W–89L career · 3 lines in 2024
6%93%1%
4.70
5
Kristina Ebon
133W–42L career · 1 line in 2024
41%59%<1%
4.53
4.5
Chandler Nguyen
18W–7L career · no lines in 2024
<1%78%22%
4.40
4.5
Kristina Chen
152W–92L career · 6 lines in 2024
<1%87%12%
4.35
Marjorie Buss
6W–6L career · no lines in 2024
4%94%2%
4.23
4.5
Christine Chen
12W–12L career · no lines in 2024
4%94%2%
4.23
4.5
Chloe Kishel
8W–10L career · no lines in 2024
13%86%<1%
4.14
4.5
Stacy Sarner
124W–86L career · 2 lines in 2024
50%50%<1%
4.00
Olivia Burtis
4W–9L career · no lines in 2024
76%24%<1%
3.91
4
Ali Baird
28W–14L career · no lines in 2024
<1%88%12%
3.85
4
Reanne Charuhas
122W–36L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%88%12%
3.84
4
VICKY TRINH
163W–101L career · 1 line in 2024
1%92%7%
3.81
4
Gayle Byrne
112W–44L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%92%7%
3.81
Lara Fermanis
9W–9L career · no lines in 2024
5%94%1%
3.72
4
Denise Gocke
72W–64L career · 2 lines in 2024
7%92%1%
3.69
Tracy Dickerson
13W–9L career · no lines in 2024
14%85%<1%
3.64
Janina Morrison
9W–7L career · no lines in 2024
20%80%<1%
3.61
3.5
Becky Leibowitz
40W–26L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%39%61%
3.54
3.5
Bu Kum Kim
122W–40L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%50%50%
3.50
Tina Yang
10W–6L career · no lines in 2024
<1%86%14%
3.36

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.