Teams

DANVILLE TC/MONTE VISTA HS 18AW3.5B

2022 ADULT 18&Over · Women's 3.5

23 players · average NTRP 3.42 / NO. 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 Women's 3.5 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 3.26 estimated across 20 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.

4.02
Karlene Steelman
published
3.74
3.69
Linda Choi
published
3.65
Whitney Johnson
published
3.62
Tuesdai Powers
published
3.54
Shannon Lynch
published
3.43
Sanna Garcia
published
3.29
Prathiba Ramamurthy
published
3.26
Julia Petrov
published
Betsy Gwynn
published 3.5
3.13
Angela Schmidt
published 3.5
3.11
Florence Huang
published 3.5
3.11
Michelle Weiss
published
3.10
Mendy Gonzales
published
3.09
Mihaela Farnholtz
published
3.02
Mickie Kerr
published
3.00
Michelle Cooke
published
2.94
Lourdes Alano
published
2.93
Florita Labrador
usually #1 Doubles 55%, also #2 Doubles 46% · published 3
2.85
Malou Matthew
published
2.67
Elaine Marshall
published 3
Leslie Souttaphonh
published
Mary Akli
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.

Michelle Weiss + Tuesdai Powers213 matchesnot enough data
Michelle Weiss + Angela Schmidt033 matchesnot enough data
Michelle Weiss + Michelle Cooke213 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.

Karlene Steelman
14W–13L career · no lines in 2022
44%56%<1%
4.02
4
Amanda Makarevich
16W–15L career · no lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.74
Linda Choi
28W–15L career · no lines in 2022
<1%8%92%
3.69
Whitney Johnson
6W–11L career · no lines in 2022
0%<1%>99%
3.65
Tuesdai Powers
24W–30L career · no lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
3.62
Shannon Lynch
8W–3L career · no lines in 2022
39%61%<1%
3.54
Sanna Garcia
13W–23L career · no lines in 2022
<1%70%30%
3.43
Prathiba Ramamurthy
3W–4L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%5%
3.29
Julia Petrov
11W–9L career · no lines in 2022
2%95%3%
3.26
3.5
Betsy Gwynn
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Angela Schmidt
9W–24L career · no lines in 2022
16%84%<1%
3.13
3.5
Florence Huang
5W–15L career · no lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
3.11
Michelle Weiss
13W–13L career · no lines in 2022
19%80%<1%
3.11
Mendy Gonzales
1W–2L career · no lines in 2022
23%77%<1%
3.10
Mihaela Farnholtz
3W–6L career · no lines in 2022
24%75%<1%
3.09
Mickie Kerr
11W–16L career · no lines in 2022
<1%44%56%
3.02
Michelle Cooke
7W–19L career · no lines in 2022
50%50%<1%
3.00
Lourdes Alano
13W–5L career · no lines in 2022
<1%67%32%
2.94
3
Florita Labrador
69W–72L career · 11 lines in 2022
<1%70%30%
2.93
Malou Matthew
7W–15L career · no lines in 2022
<1%87%12%
2.85
3
Elaine Marshall
8W–12L career · no lines in 2022
9%90%1%
2.67
Leslie Souttaphonh
3W–3L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Mary Akli
1W–1L career · no lines in 2022
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.