Teams

SFV - Babeolats

2024 Adult 18+ SFV Spring · SFV 18 & Over - Women 3.5

11 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 →
Schedule5 played
2024-06-29vs SFV - Shadow's AcesWon 20
W#1 DoublesDeborah Kerr-Orlik / Lianne Noddle vs Karen Seifert / Sharon Spangler7-6, 6-3
W#1 SinglesCatherine Haggett vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2024-06-27vs SFV - Simply Smashing 3.5Won 10
W#1 DoublesTara Sickmeier / Deborah Kerr-Orlik vs Marilyn Germann / Sara Miller6-4, 6-2
L#1 SinglesCatherine Haggett vs Iza Sob2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesGina Caruso / Deborah Kerr-Orlik vs Casondra Ruga / Samira Sizdahkhani0-6, 7-6, 0-1
2024-06-02vs SFV - Hot ShotsWon 10
W#1 SinglesCatherine Haggett vs Kristen Stills6-2, 7-5
2024-04-28vs SFV - Chicks With Sticks 3.5Lost 01
L#1 SinglesCatherine Haggett vs Tricia Kim4-6, 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 SFV 18 & Over - Women 3.5 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 3.16 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.

3.65
Lisa Cloughesy
published 4
3.35
Catherine Haggett
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.20
Gina Caruso
published
3.19
Mina Yang
published
3.17
Lianne Noddle
published
3.15
Christine de la Hoz
published 3.5
3.14
Madi Rosenberg
published
2.99
Deborah Kerr-Orlik
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.60
Kelly Fredrickson
published
Tina Glantz
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.

Mina Yang + Christine de la Hoz314 matchesnot enough data
Deborah Kerr-Orlik + Catherine Haggett033 matchesnot enough data
Gina Caruso + Mina Yang303 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.

4
Lisa Cloughesy
50W–34L career · no lines in 2024
14%86%1%
3.65
3.5
Catherine Haggett
99W–122L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%86%14%
3.35
Gina Caruso
6W–7L career · no lines in 2024
7%91%2%
3.20
Mina Yang
16W–4L career · no lines in 2024
<1%8%92%
3.19
Lianne Noddle
2W–5L career · no lines in 2024
12%87%1%
3.17
3.5
Christine de la Hoz
4W–7L career · no lines in 2024
15%84%1%
3.15
Madi Rosenberg
3W–3L career · no lines in 2024
<1%16%84%
3.14
3.5
Deborah Kerr-Orlik
57W–134L career · type A · 3 lines in 2024
52%48%<1%
2.99
3
Deborah Goldberger
0W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Kelly Fredrickson
3W–11L career · no lines in 2024
24%76%<1%
2.60
Tina Glantz
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.