Teams

NAPA V CC CW5.5A

2022 COMBO · Women 5.5

15 players · average NTRP 2.83 / 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 →
Schedule1 played
2026-08-27vs NAPA VALLEY TC/VINTAGE HS CW5.5BLost 03
L#1 DoublesMajella Campbell / Marcela Mejia vs Amanda DeBord / Michelle van de Pol0-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJosephine Palacios / Lindy Bouwer vs Brie Cadman / Jolinda Gladstein0-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesDeborah Dever / Nancy Tarantino vs Valerie Mitchell-Johnson / Lindsey Levine0-6, 0-6
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 Women 5.5 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 2.73 estimated across 13 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.

3.19
Yukie Toyama
published
2.94
Kristen Kincaid
published
2.91
Sharon Wippern
published
2.89
Sarah Marriott
published
2.82
Josephine Palacios
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.79
Lisa Aldrich
published
2.69
Lindy Bouwer
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.69
Alison Dragoo
published 3
2.63
Nancy Tarantino
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.61
Majella Campbell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.46
Diane de Seve
published 2.5
2.45
Janet Tupper
published
2.43
Barbara Lum
published 3
Karin Oliver
published
Regan Reid
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.

Kristen Kincaid + Yukie Toyama6160% games+6.7% vs expected
Kristen Kincaid + Sharon Wippern303 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.

Yukie Toyama
17W–6L career · no lines in 2022
<1%8%92%
3.19
Kristen Kincaid
15W–3L career · no lines in 2022
<1%67%33%
2.94
Sharon Wippern
16W–22L career · no lines in 2022
<1%75%24%
2.91
Sarah Marriott
5W–4L career · no lines in 2022
<1%79%21%
2.89
Josephine Palacios
4W–3L career · 1 line in 2022
1%91%8%
2.82
Lisa Aldrich
2W–3L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%5%
2.79
Lindy Bouwer
4W–8L career · 1 line in 2022
7%92%1%
2.69
3
Alison Dragoo
2W–6L career · no lines in 2022
8%91%1%
2.69
Nancy Tarantino
6W–6L career · 1 line in 2022
16%84%<1%
2.63
Majella Campbell
1W–3L career · 1 line in 2022
20%80%<1%
2.61
2.5
Diane de Seve
3W–9L career · no lines in 2022
0%61%39%
2.46
Janet Tupper
1W–7L career · no lines in 2022
65%35%<1%
2.45
3
Barbara Lum
6W–7L career · no lines in 2022
72%28%<1%
2.43
Karin Oliver
1W–4L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Regan Reid
1W–2L 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.