Teams

Laredo Women's 55 7.0 Team A

Adult 55 & Over League · Women's 7.0

8 players · average NTRP 3.40 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-04-22vs Laredo Women's 55 7.0 Team BWon 30
W#1 DoublesVilma Gonzalez / Mamta Pandya vs Cynthia Paredes / Alejandra Covarrubias6-1, 7-5
W#2 DoublesCindy Robledo / Alice Werstak vs Tammy Trevino / Patricia Carranza6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCarllyn Walker / Irene de la Fuente vs Julia Cavazos / Sara Lara7-5, 3-6, 1-0
2026-04-21vs Laredo Women's 55 7.0 Team BWon 30
W#1 DoublesCarllyn Walker / Mamta Pandya vs Julia Cavazos / Patricia Carranza6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesToni Cantu / Alicia Medina vs Tammy Trevino / Sara Lara6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAlice Werstak / Cindy Robledo vs Cynthia Paredes / Alejandra Covarrubias6-3, 7-5
2026-04-20vs Laredo Women's 55 7.0 Team BWon 30
W#1 DoublesAlicia Medina / Carllyn Walker vs Sara Lara / Tammy Trevino1-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesVilma Gonzalez / Toni Cantu vs Alejandra Covarrubias / Julia Cavazos5-7, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCindy Robledo / Irene de la Fuente vs Cynthia Paredes / Patricia Carranza6-4, 7-5
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 standings2 teams · Women's 7.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Laredo Women's 55 7.0 Team A3090478
2Laredo Women's 55 7.0 Team B030918105

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 3.11 estimated across 6 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.

3.87
Cindy Robledo
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.33
Alicia Medina
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.06
Carllyn Walker
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.02
Toni Cantu
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.80
Irene de la Fuente
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.62
Alice Werstak
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
Mamta Pandya
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Vilma Gonzalez
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Carllyn Walker + Vilma Gonzalez044 matchesnot enough data
Carllyn Walker + Alicia Medina213 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
Cindy Robledo
23W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%84%16%
3.87
3.5
Alicia Medina
18W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.33
3.5
Carllyn Walker
8W–12L career · 3 lines in 2026
33%67%<1%
3.06
Toni Cantu
2W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
44%56%<1%
3.02
3
Irene de la Fuente
4W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%93%6%
2.80
3
Alice Werstak
11W–0L career · 2 lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
2.62
Mamta Pandya
13W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Vilma Gonzalez
5W–11L career · 2 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.