Teams

SGV Queens of the Court-Yu-Arroyo Seco/SA4

2024 SoCal Doubles 18 & Over - San Gabriel Valley · SGV - Women 3.5

15 players · average NTRP 3.43 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
L#1 DoublesFelicia Yu / Lilly Shuton vs Tina Gong / Demmi Setyono0-6, 1-6
2024-10-26vs SGV Dare Doubles-Gardner-WN/SAWon 10
W#2 DoublesDanette Stein / Lilly Shuton vs Alice Markowski / Sandra Zane6-2, 4-6, 1-0
2024-10-13vs SGV Ball Hogs-Yip-Arroyo/SU2Lost 01
L#2 DoublesLilly Shuton / Danette Stein vs Ming-Ming Peng / Jenny Lin1-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesLilly Shuton / Johanna Baumann vs Charlotte Pereira Reisch / Linda Kronseder1-6, 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 SGV - 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 3.06 estimated across 14 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
Darlene Scott
published 4
3.54
Cristina Padron
published 3.5
3.26
Mindy Schiffman
published 3.5
3.16
Danette Stein
published 3.5
3.15
Makiko Sato
published
3.13
Sanja Morris
published
3.04
Lilly Shuton
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.00
Trecia Mendoza
published
2.96
DARCELIA WILSON
published 3
2.91
Andrea Fruits
published 3
2.87
Felicia Yu
published
2.77
Teryl Murphy
published
2.73
Johanna Baumann
published
2.72
Sharon Spangler
published
Juliet Amenta
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.

DARCELIA WILSON + Trecia Mendoza9264% games+6.8% vs expected
Sharon Spangler + Andrea Fruits224 matchesnot enough data
Mindy Schiffman + Lilly Shuton123 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
Darlene Scott
1W–5L career · no lines in 2024
14%86%1%
3.65
3.5
Cristina Padron
12W–16L career · no lines in 2024
<1%38%62%
3.54
3.5
Mindy Schiffman
84W–100L career · no lines in 2024
3%93%4%
3.26
3.5
Danette Stein
4W–5L career · no lines in 2024
13%87%1%
3.16
Makiko Sato
2W–2L career · no lines in 2024
15%85%1%
3.15
Sanja Morris
2W–1L career · no lines in 2024
17%82%<1%
3.13
3.5
Lilly Shuton
90W–82L career · 4 lines in 2024
39%61%<1%
3.04
Trecia Mendoza
13W–5L career · no lines in 2024
<1%49%51%
3.00
3
DARCELIA WILSON
12W–7L career · no lines in 2024
<1%61%38%
2.96
3
Andrea Fruits
15W–13L career · no lines in 2024
<1%75%25%
2.91
Felicia Yu
0W–9L career · no lines in 2024
82%18%<1%
2.87
Teryl Murphy
4W–2L career · no lines in 2024
3%92%5%
2.77
Johanna Baumann
9W–18L career · no lines in 2024
5%92%3%
2.73
Sharon Spangler
8W–16L career · no lines in 2024
5%92%2%
2.72
Juliet Amenta
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.