Teams

SGV Live Oaks Ladies-Perry-Live Oaks/SA1

2026 SoCal Doubles 18 & Over - San Gabriel Valley · SGV - Women 4.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.93 / 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 standings9 teams · SGV - Women 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SGV Creme de la Court-Kim-Flint CYN/SU2000000
2SGV Queens of the Court- Vuong-Arroyo Seco/SA4000000
3SGV Tennis Addicts-James Lee-Arroyo HS/SU12000000
4SGV Live Oaks Ladies-Perry-Live Oaks/SA1000000
5SGV TCC- Johnson-Claremont Club/SU8000000
6SGV Terminetters- Bennett-Fremont Park/SA5000000
7SGV Fall Gummies-Manley-Arroyo HS/SU8000000
8SGV Lovers over Lobbers-Aye-San Dimas -SA1000000
9SGV Mo Better Tennis-DeRosa-WN/SA10000000

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 3.59 estimated across 13 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.

3.81
Stephanie Perry
published 4
3.79
Amy Newhall
published 4
3.75
3.74
Danica Hughes
published 4
3.63
Ann Messana
published 4
3.62
Katie Tong
published
3.62
Kasia Chmielewski
published
3.57
Sharon Li
published
3.57
Sandra Manion
published
3.46
Nancy Ray
published
3.44
Aram Hamidi
published 4
3.37
Teri McClure
published
3.26
Mindy Schiffman
published 3.5
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.

Ann Messana + Amy Newhall4155% games+4.3% vs expected
Kasia Chmielewski + Stephanie Perry3545% games−1.8% vs expected
Stephanie Perry + Amy Newhall8458% games−6.3% vs expected
Sharon Li + Sandra Manion1433% games−10.3% vs expected
Ann Messana + Stephanie Perry5161% gamesnot enough data
Kasia Chmielewski + Christyne Burdett213 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Perry + Sandra Manion303 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Perry + Christyne Burdett303 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
Stephanie Perry
183W–106L career · no lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.81
4
Amy Newhall
126W–55L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.79
4
Christyne Burdett
6W–4L career · no lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.75
4
Danica Hughes
10W–6L career · no lines in 2026
4%92%3%
3.74
4
Ann Messana
6W–6L career · no lines in 2026
18%81%<1%
3.63
Katie Tong
18W–8L career · no lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.62
Kasia Chmielewski
9W–12L career · no lines in 2026
<1%19%81%
3.62
Sharon Li
13W–10L career · no lines in 2026
30%70%<1%
3.57
Sandra Manion
6W–10L career · no lines in 2026
31%69%<1%
3.57
Nancy Ray
11W–11L career · no lines in 2026
<1%61%39%
3.46
4
Aram Hamidi
1W–5L career · no lines in 2026
68%32%<1%
3.44
Teri McClure
15W–12L career · no lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.37
3.5
Mindy Schiffman
84W–100L career · no lines in 2026
3%93%4%
3.26

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.