Teams

SD 7.0 Vintage/ Randquist

2026 Adult 55 & Over Summer- SD · SDNC WE

11 players · average NTRP 3.45 / SAN DIEGO

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-08-16vs SD 7.0 FRCC/ HackettLost 12
L#1 DoublesGabrielle Oratz / Daren Hillebrandt vs Jennifer Hackett / Felicia Kappes6-4, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMiller McCord / Tina Mertel vs Haixin Li / Junli Feng6-3, 5-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSusie Alvarez / Amy Holzer vs Hillary Emery / Joyce Reading1-6, 5-7
2026-07-26vs SD 7.0 SDTRC/ DubeLost 02
L#1 DoublesDaren Hillebrandt / Tina Mertel vs Lisa Shirley / Lori Jellison7-5, 0-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesShelly Patriquin / Amy Snyder vs Carri Burns / Lisa Bolelli3-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesMiller McCord / Shelly Patriquin vs Megumi Bolger / Yvonne Bentle6-3, 6-3
2026-07-05vs SD 7.0 FRCC/ HackettWon 10
W#3 DoublesDana Davalos / Shelly Patriquin vs Jodie Simbolon / Junli Feng6-1, 6-4
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 standings4 teams · SDNC WE
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SD LLW WE 7.0 Balboa Racquettes/ Estevane5114412127
2SD 7.0 FRCC/ Hackett339920165
3SD 7.0 SDTRC/ Dube2471125186
4SD 7.0 Vintage/ Randquist2461226188

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 3.22 estimated across 11 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.

3.58
Dana Davalos
published 3.5
3.42
Susie Alvarez
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.30
Tina Mertel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.28
Shelly Patriquin
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.26
Miller McCord
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.24
Gabrielle Oratz
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.24
Pam Trent
published 3.5
3.23
Dianne Randquist
published 3.5
3.19
Daren Hillebrandt
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.93
Susan Schraeder
published 3
2.80
Amy Holzer
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
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.

Miller McCord + Tina Mertel4250% games+2.8% vs expected
Dianne Randquist + Pam Trent51541% games−14.6% vs expected
Susie Alvarez + Amy Holzer1439% gamesnot enough data
Dianne Randquist + Dana Davalos224 matchesnot enough data
Dianne Randquist + Susan Schraeder213 matchesnot enough data
Miller McCord + Shelly Patriquin213 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.

3.5
Dana Davalos
90W–54L career · no lines in 2026
<1%27%73%
3.58
4
Susie Alvarez
84W–81L career · 1 line in 2026
73%27%<1%
3.42
3.5
Tina Mertel
36W–29L career · 1 line in 2026
1%93%6%
3.30
Shelly Patriquin
7W–5L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.28
3.5
Miller McCord
72W–61L career · 1 line in 2026
2%95%3%
3.26
3.5
Gabrielle Oratz
4W–4L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Pam Trent
53W–65L career · no lines in 2026
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Dianne Randquist
40W–52L career · no lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.23
3.5
Daren Hillebrandt
3W–11L career · 2 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
3.19
3
Susan Schraeder
64W–111L career · no lines in 2026
<1%71%29%
2.93
3
Amy Holzer
80W–104L career · 1 line in 2026
1%93%6%
2.80

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.