Teams

2022 Tri Level Womens 40- Mariela

2022 Tri Level 40 & Over · 2022 Tri Level Womens 40

10 players · average NTRP 3.57 / PUERTO RICO

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2022-12-08vs 2022 Tri Level Womens 40- DarcyLost 02
L#2 DoublesJohanna Padro / Jennifer Rabell Torres vs Irene Feliu / Janet Ortiz2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMariela Vega / Thynia Rivera vs Lorena Ocasio / Mayte Vivaldi6-7, 6-7
W#2 DoublesJennifer Rabell Torres / Johanna Padro vs Mariel Rivera Fernandez / Marie Santiago6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesYamile Alicea / Marie Rodriguez vs Nilka Rosado / Maria Gutierrez6-2, 6-0
2022-12-03vs 2022 Tri Level Womens 40- MoniqueSplit 11
L#2 DoublesElisa Rivera / Jennifer Rabell Torres vs Marisol Ramos / Mileng Ng6-7, 3-6
W#3 DoublesMarie Rodriguez / Mariela Vega vs Alexandra Valentin / Araceli Medina6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJennifer Rabell Torres / Elisa Rivera vs Cecelia Puopolo / Windy Pagan Pagan6-3, 6-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMariela Vega / Yamile Alicea vs Denisse Jove / Brooke Heckert5-7, 6-7
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 2022 Tri Level Womens 40 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 3.32 estimated across 7 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.

3.72
Marie Rodriguez
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.53
Claudia Arana
published 4
3.50
Irmaris Pizarro
published 4
3.30
Thynia Rivera
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.27
Jennifer Rabell Torres
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Elisa Rivera
published 3.5
3.06
Mariela Vega
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.84
Yamile Alicea
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Johanna Padro
published
Suzette Olivieri
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.

Mariela Vega + Marie Rodriguez5073% games+17.6% vs expected
Jennifer Rabell Torres + Mariela Vega4450% games+10.0% vs expected
Mariela Vega + Yamile Alicea4259% games+4.3% vs expected
Suzette Olivieri + Irmaris Pizarro5258% games+2.1% vs expected
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.

Marie Rodriguez
181W–64L career · 2 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.72
4
Claudia Arana
25W–31L career · no lines in 2022
41%59%<1%
3.53
4
Irmaris Pizarro
10W–29L career · no lines in 2022
51%49%<1%
3.50
3.5
Thynia Rivera
93W–72L career · 1 line in 2022
1%93%6%
3.30
3.5
Jennifer Rabell Torres
69W–65L career · 4 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Elisa Rivera
5W–8L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Mariela Vega
108W–66L career · 3 lines in 2022
31%69%<1%
3.06
3
Yamile Alicea
124W–102L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%89%11%
2.84
Johanna Padro
25W–24L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Suzette Olivieri
39W–25L 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.