Teams

BC-MCC/RachelAlexander4.0

2026 SoCal Doubles - Beach Cities · BC Women - 4.0

24 players · average NTRP 3.71 / 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 →
Flight standings8 teams · BC Women - 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1BC-MCC/SarahSautot4.0000000
2BC-MCC/LeasaIreland4.0000000
3BC-WestEnd/NoreenWenjen4.0000000
4BC-BJKTC/JoGarrett4.0000000
5BC-MCC/RachelAlexander4.0000000
6BC-WestEnd/MaryKayDyes4.0000000
7BC-MiraCosta/PamelaHayes4.0000000
8BC-AltaVista/TracyCostano4.0000000

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.54 estimated across 21 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.

3.82
Angela Dax
published 4
3.80
Pamela Lopez
published
3.73
Renee Tinker
published
3.71
Mariel VandenHengel
published
3.70
Robin Terry
published
3.69
Denise Coit
published 4
3.69
Linda Lai
published
3.68
Elizabeth Alexander
published
3.68
Faye Cavanaugh
published
3.63
Frances Hong
published 4
3.56
Layla Kiffin
published
3.53
Ellen Lauricella
published
3.52
Frances Nelson
published
3.51
Taylor Rayfield
published
3.50
Jenny Jackson
published
3.37
Anne Lee
published 3.5
3.36
Jill Halkias
published
3.35
Christina Ahn
published 3.5
Ashley Hansen
published 3.5
3.20
Kimberly Graham
published
3.18
Audra Steller
published 3.5
3.11
Rachel Alexander
published
Julie Tendoesschate
published
Mimi Fischer
published
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
Angela Dax
6W–3L career · no lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.82
Pamela Lopez
21W–8L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.80
Renee Tinker
3W–10L career · no lines in 2026
5%92%3%
3.73
Mariel VandenHengel
31W–31L career · no lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.71
Robin Terry
2W–2L career · no lines in 2026
8%91%2%
3.70
4
Denise Coit
21W–11L career · no lines in 2026
8%90%1%
3.69
Linda Lai
6W–7L career · no lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.69
Elizabeth Alexander
6W–7L career · no lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.68
Faye Cavanaugh
5W–14L career · no lines in 2026
10%89%1%
3.68
4
Frances Hong
74W–93L career · no lines in 2026
18%82%<1%
3.63
Layla Kiffin
4W–8L career · no lines in 2026
33%67%<1%
3.56
Ellen Lauricella
2W–3L career · no lines in 2026
40%60%<1%
3.53
Frances Nelson
2W–3L career · no lines in 2026
46%54%<1%
3.52
Taylor Rayfield
8W–5L career · no lines in 2026
47%53%<1%
3.51
Jenny Jackson
13W–5L career · no lines in 2026
49%51%<1%
3.50
3.5
Anne Lee
7W–7L career · no lines in 2026
<1%82%17%
3.37
Jill Halkias
0W–3L career · no lines in 2026
84%16%<1%
3.36
3.5
Christina Ahn
4W–6L career · no lines in 2026
1%85%15%
3.35
3.5
Ashley Hansen
2W–4L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Kimberly Graham
38W–35L career · no lines in 2026
98%2%<1%
3.20
3.5
Audra Steller
3W–12L career · no lines in 2026
9%89%1%
3.18
Rachel Alexander
1W–4L career · no lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.11
Julie Tendoesschate
15W–15L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Mimi Fischer
16W–19L career · no lines in 2026
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.