Teams

BC-MCC/JhoannaTorres

2023 Adult 40 & Over - Beach Cities · BC Women - 4.0

23 players · average NTRP 4.17 / 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 standings for BC Women - 4.0 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 3.76 estimated across 18 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.

4.53
Sejal Penkar
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.17
Kelly Robson
published
4.17
Lindsay Ashcraft
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
3.88
Kristina Schrader
published
3.77
Carrie Arsenault
published 4
3.77
Denise Towsley
published 4
Becky Anzivino
published 4
3.73
Serene Peterson
published
3.71
Leasa Ireland
published
3.70
Kelli Spriggs
published
3.68
Kristen Finn
published
3.67
Lauren Bruksch
published
3.67
Jhoanna Torres
published
3.64
Kris Rone
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.63
Frances Hong
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.61
Bernice Lake
published 4
3.57
Aparna Voleti
published 4
3.38
Julie Watts
published
3.36
Jill Halkias
published
Heidi Weber
published
JoAnn Totzke
published
Lisa Schlager
published
Mimi Fischer
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.

Lindsay Ashcraft + Sejal Penkar8256% gamesnot enough data
Kris Rone + Lauren Bruksch044 matchesnot enough data
Lindsay Ashcraft + Kelly Robson213 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.

5
Sejal Penkar
50W–25L career · 3 lines in 2023
no projection at this level
4.53
Kelly Robson
1W–3L career · no lines in 2023
11%88%1%
4.17
4.5
Lindsay Ashcraft
74W–39L career · 4 lines in 2023
11%88%1%
4.17
Kristina Schrader
3W–2L career · no lines in 2023
<1%80%20%
3.88
4
Carrie Arsenault
65W–33L career · no lines in 2023
2%92%5%
3.77
4
Denise Towsley
8W–0L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.77
4
Becky Anzivino
1W–1L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Serene Peterson
8W–9L career · no lines in 2023
5%92%3%
3.73
Leasa Ireland
7W–7L career · no lines in 2023
7%91%2%
3.71
Kelli Spriggs
1W–3L career · no lines in 2023
7%91%2%
3.70
Kristen Finn
5W–1L career · no lines in 2023
10%89%1%
3.68
Lauren Bruksch
2W–10L career · no lines in 2023
11%88%1%
3.67
Jhoanna Torres
5W–2L career · no lines in 2023
11%88%1%
3.67
4
Kris Rone
71W–60L career · 4 lines in 2023
17%83%<1%
3.64
4
Frances Hong
74W–93L career · 2 lines in 2023
18%82%<1%
3.63
4
Bernice Lake
1W–2L career · no lines in 2023
21%78%<1%
3.61
4
Aparna Voleti
1W–2L career · no lines in 2023
31%69%<1%
3.57
Julie Watts
0W–3L career · no lines in 2023
80%20%<1%
3.38
Jill Halkias
0W–3L career · no lines in 2023
84%16%<1%
3.36
Heidi Weber
4W–1L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
JoAnn Totzke
1W–0L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Lisa Schlager
0W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Mimi Fischer
16W–19L career · no lines in 2023
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.