Teams

SGV Dare Doubles-Flores-WN/SU12

2023 Adult Division - 18 & Over San Gabriel Valley · SGV - Women 3.0

10 players · average NTRP 3.33 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
L#1 DoublesRoxanne Wu / Christine Pedroza vs Michaela Humby / Cathy Lee3-6, 0-6
W#1 SinglesPam Barbato vs Lilly Shuton6-0, 6-2
W#2 DoublesFlorence Chen / GINA SKIBAR vs Sanja Morris / Andrea Fruits6-1, 7-6
W#3 DoublesPatricia Marshall / Jill Jobran vs Camille Farnsworth / Trecia Mendoza7-6, 7-5
W#1 DoublesChristine Pedroza / Roxanne Wu vs Stefani Galvagni / Karen Willaman7-5, 6-0
W#2 SinglesJill Jobran vs Alice Markowski6-1, 6-1
L#1 DoublesPatricia Marshall / GINA SKIBAR vs Grace Eleyae / Jill Tomich2-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJill Jobran / Shirley Flores vs Mariana Glovsky / Katherine Friedman3-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 SinglesPam Barbato vs Rebecca Mills6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesJill Jobran / Shirley Flores vs Juliette Roberts / Teresa Magsaysay6-0, 6-2
L#1 DoublesPin Hong / Jill Jobran vs Andrea Fruits / Sanja Morris3-6, 3-6
W#1 SinglesPam Barbato vs Abbey Everson6-1, 7-6
W#1 DoublesChristine Pedroza / GINA SKIBAR vs Pauline Mauro / Karen Willaman6-1, 6-0
W#3 DoublesJill Jobran / Roxanne Wu vs Keum Ko / Ann Choe6-1, 6-0
W#1 DoublesGINA SKIBAR / Pin Hong vs Cerena Cooper / Juliette Roberts6-3, 6-0
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 SGV - Women 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 3.12 estimated across 9 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.

3.54
Jill Jobran
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.39
Demmi Setyono
published 3.5
3.38
Shannon Koeppen
published
3.31
Pam Barbato
usually #2 Singles 60%, also #1 Singles 30% · published 3.5
3.11
GINA SKIBAR
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.97
Florence Chen
published
2.88
Christine Pedroza
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.78
Joyce Zhu
published
ANALILY PARK
published 3
2.72
Tamara Sobel
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.

GINA SKIBAR + Jill Jobran213 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
Jill Jobran
171W–46L career · 6 lines in 2023
<1%39%61%
3.54
3.5
Demmi Setyono
6W–14L career · no lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
3.39
Shannon Koeppen
29W–12L career · no lines in 2023
<1%<1%>99%
3.38
3.5
Pam Barbato
100W–64L career · 10 lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.31
3.5
GINA SKIBAR
114W–80L career · 4 lines in 2023
22%78%<1%
3.11
Florence Chen
1W–3L career · no lines in 2023
<1%59%41%
2.97
3
Christine Pedroza
39W–40L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%80%20%
2.88
Joyce Zhu
10W–18L career · no lines in 2023
2%92%6%
2.78
3
ANALILY PARK
2W–4L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Tamara Sobel
3W–2L career · no lines in 2023
6%92%2%
2.72

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.