Teams

SFV - Racketeers

2023 SoCal Doubles 18+ SFV Fall · SFV 18 & Over - Women 3.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.00 / 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 →
Schedule4 played
2023-12-17vs SFV - First StringLost 01
L#1 DoublesJennifer Haber / Angie Pradia vs Gabrielle Shrier / Cindy Larson6-7, 4-6
2023-10-21vs SFV - Chicks With SticksWon 10
W#2 DoublesJennifer Haber / Angie Pradia vs Penny Oxciano / Carol Stevenson6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2023-10-07vs SFV - NetChicksLost 01
L#3 DoublesIvonne Mendez / Angie Pradia vs CHERYL KEEHNE / Salisa Wagner4-6, 1-6
2023-09-17vs SFV - Simply Smashing 3.0Won 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Haber / Angie Pradia vs Christine Johnson / Aline MacK7-5, 6-2
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 standings for SFV 18 & Over - Women 3.0 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 2.64 estimated across 10 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.

2.88
Martha Iveth Zarate
published
2.86
Jennifer Haber
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.74
Angie Pradia
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.69
Letty King
published
2.60
Pamela Bentley
published
2.59
Carolyn Bisson
published 3
2.56
Gloria Cardoza
published
2.52
Tes MacAraya
published
2.49
Jacqueline Hantgan
published
2.48
Robina Markarian
published
Liberty Peralta
published
Rosine Simitian
published
Yvonne Brooks
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.

Angie Pradia + Jennifer Haber121451% games+9.1% vs expected
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.

Martha Iveth Zarate
3W–1L career · no lines in 2023
<1%80%20%
2.88
3
Jennifer Haber
74W–64L career · 3 lines in 2023
1%84%15%
2.86
3
Angie Pradia
47W–54L career · 4 lines in 2023
4%93%3%
2.74
Letty King
5W–6L career · no lines in 2023
9%90%1%
2.69
Pamela Bentley
9W–7L career · no lines in 2023
25%75%<1%
2.60
3
Carolyn Bisson
3W–4L career · no lines in 2023
25%75%<1%
2.59
Gloria Cardoza
7W–8L career · no lines in 2023
34%66%<1%
2.56
Tes MacAraya
1W–4L career · no lines in 2023
43%57%<1%
2.52
Jacqueline Hantgan
4W–1L career · no lines in 2023
52%48%<1%
2.49
Robina Markarian
2W–9L career · no lines in 2023
57%43%<1%
2.48
Liberty Peralta
0W–3L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Rosine Simitian
0W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Yvonne Brooks
0W–1L 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.