Teams

CC MBHS Court Queens

2026 USTA CC Summer Adult Tri-Level 18 & OVER · CC Low Tri-Level Adult 18 & Over

15 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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
2026-08-30vs CC Paso McKenzieLost 03
L#1 DoublesDina Krull / Hanna Smith vs Keba Baird / Anji Perry3-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesKristen MacHamer / Carol Hall vs Jennifer Chambers / Gretel Crum1-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesBarbara Babka / Marty Nitzberg vs Kori Mason / Brooke Krumheuer1-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-08-23vs CC SLOCC StrongLost 12
W#1 DoublesDina Krull / Daisy Dustan vs Kristin Newsom / Sarah Pedersen6-4, 6-0
L#2 DoublesAryn Jorgensen / Maggie Browning vs Danielle Corry / Abrianna Rose3-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesMarty Nitzberg / Jennifer Manduffie vs Michelle Quibell / Valerie Fu3-6, 0-6
2026-08-16vs CC Avila SainsburyWon 30
W#1 DoublesDaisy Dustan / Hanna Smith vs Shannon Dossa / Michelle Adam6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAryn Jorgensen / Kelli Salter vs Colleen Moss / Deborah VANDENBERG6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMorri Nash / Erin Sjoholm vs Megan Kostelnik / Marie Loughead3-6, 6-0, 1-0
2026-08-02vs CC SMCC MealsLost 12
W#1 DoublesLori Smith / Kelli Salter vs Jen Haskell / Katelynn Haskell6-4, 7-5
L#2 DoublesKristen MacHamer / Tara Teitge vs Corrie Meals / Samantha Stollberg4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJennifer Manduffie / Pamela Hostetter vs Ramona Cabiles / Teresa Klostermann2-6, 5-7
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 standings5 teams · CC Low Tri-Level Adult 18 & Over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CC SLOCC Strong2051236
2CC MBHS Court Queens1142550
3CC SMCC Meals1124864
4CC Paso McKenzie0112531
5CC Avila Sainsbury0103634

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 3.15 estimated across 15 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.

3.88
Hanna Smith
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.65
Dina Krull
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.55
Kelli Salter
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.34
3.21
Aryn Jorgensen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.21
Maggie Browning
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.10
Tara Teitge
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.04
Erin Sjoholm
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.03
Kristen MacHamer
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.02
Pamela Hostetter
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.97
Trish Ross
published
2.94
Morri Nash
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.90
Jennifer Manduffie
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.84
Barbara Babka
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.58
Marty Nitzberg
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Marty Nitzberg + Jennifer Manduffie31031% games−8.7% vs expected
Pamela Hostetter + Morri Nash5158% gamesnot enough data
Pamela Hostetter + Jennifer Manduffie134 matchesnot enough data
Dina Krull + Hanna Smith213 matchesnot enough data
Aryn Jorgensen + Kelli Salter303 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
Hanna Smith
33W–8L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%81%18%
3.88
4
Dina Krull
5W–8L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
13%87%<1%
3.65
Kelli Salter
19W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.55
Michelle Ritter-Taylor
5W–2L career · no lines in 2026
<1%88%11%
3.34
3.5
Aryn Jorgensen
34W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
5%94%1%
3.21
Maggie Browning
8W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
5%93%1%
3.21
Tara Teitge
2W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.10
3
Erin Sjoholm
5W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%37%63%
3.04
Kristen MacHamer
2W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
40%60%<1%
3.03
Pamela Hostetter
15W–19L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%44%56%
3.02
Trish Ross
19W–12L career · no lines in 2026
<1%60%40%
2.97
Morri Nash
26W–20L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%69%31%
2.94
Jennifer Manduffie
38W–40L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
2.90
3
Barbara Babka
13W–11L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%89%11%
2.84
Marty Nitzberg
16W–64L career · 2 lines in 2026
28%72%<1%
2.58

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.