Teams

MONTE VISTA HS CW7.5A

2025 COMBO · Women 7.5

28 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 →
Schedule4 played
2025-10-19vs FREMONT TC CW7.5BLost 01
L#1 DoublesNancy Blom / Gayle Millington vs Danielle Duperly / Fang Wong1-6, 4-6
2025-10-08vs CHABOT CANYON CW7.5BWon 10
W#3 DoublesShannon Puente / Rachel Falk vs Kara Crowe / Emiko Motomura6-1, 6-4
2025-09-27vs FREMONT TC CW7.5CLost 01
L#2 DoublesJudy Chang / Fedwa Booth vs Dorita Castillano / Wennie Nie5-7, 2-6
2025-09-14vs FREMONT TC CW7.5CLost 02
L#2 DoublesRachel Falk / Barbara Brooks vs Wennie Nie / Kimba Warford4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesGayle Millington / Sahana Iyer vs Frances Caroline Gardhouse / Mai Pham0-6, 0-6
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 Women 7.5 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 3.22 estimated across 27 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.

3.62
Inna Leypold
published 4
3.56
Melissa Abadia
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.51
Rachel Falk
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.50
Michelle Dayco
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.44
Judy Chang
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.43
Sanna Garcia
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.37
Caroline D Sherbourne
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.34
Rattana Graff
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.33
Jessica Vasisht
published
3.29
Sahana Iyer
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.28
Janet Race
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.27
Nancy Blom
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.24
Dana Andrew
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.22
Michelle Holcenberg
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.21
Cathy Althoff
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.17
Cynthia Attiyeh
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.14
Kris Courtney
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.14
Barbara Brooks
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.11
Florence Huang
published 3.5
3.08
Vanya Georgieva
published
3.08
Danielle Willis
published 3.5
2.99
Kiroun Saluja
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.93
Florita Labrador
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.93
Meilan Liu
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
2.92
Daljeet Singh
published 3.5
2.88
Gayle Millington
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.83
Fedwa Booth
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
Mayra Dominguez
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Sanna Garcia + Jessica Vasisht4256% games−1.7% vs expected
Nancy Blom + Cathy Althoff5646% games−4.0% vs expected
Daljeet Singh + Sanna Garcia044 matchesnot enough data
Janet Race + Cynthia Attiyeh123 matchesnot enough data
Nancy Blom + Gayle Millington213 matchesnot enough data
Dana Andrew + Michelle Holcenberg033 matchesnot enough data
Judy Chang + Melissa Abadia033 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
Inna Leypold
1W–7L career · no lines in 2025
18%82%<1%
3.62
Melissa Abadia
9W–20L career · 2 lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
3.56
Rachel Falk
17W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%48%52%
3.51
Michelle Dayco
21W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%50%50%
3.50
Judy Chang
6W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
68%32%<1%
3.44
Sanna Garcia
13W–23L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%70%30%
3.43
3.5
Caroline D Sherbourne
9W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%84%16%
3.37
Rattana Graff
4W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
89%11%<1%
3.34
Jessica Vasisht
15W–7L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%10%
3.33
Sahana Iyer
2W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
95%5%<1%
3.29
Janet Race
9W–21L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.28
Nancy Blom
12W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Dana Andrew
10W–23L career · 3 lines in 2025
3%94%2%
3.24
Michelle Holcenberg
9W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
5%94%2%
3.22
3.5
Cathy Althoff
8W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
5%93%1%
3.21
3.5
Cynthia Attiyeh
11W–21L career · type A · 3 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.17
Kris Courtney
15W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
14%86%<1%
3.14
3.5
Barbara Brooks
0W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
15%85%<1%
3.14
3.5
Florence Huang
5W–15L career · no lines in 2025
19%81%<1%
3.11
Vanya Georgieva
8W–9L career · no lines in 2025
28%72%<1%
3.08
3.5
Danielle Willis
3W–6L career · no lines in 2025
28%72%<1%
3.08
Kiroun Saluja
1W–8L career · 2 lines in 2025
52%48%<1%
2.99
3
Florita Labrador
69W–72L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
2.93
Meilan Liu
10W–22L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%71%28%
2.93
3.5
Daljeet Singh
3W–25L career · no lines in 2025
73%27%<1%
2.92
3
Gayle Millington
5W–14L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%82%18%
2.88
3
Fedwa Booth
12W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%90%10%
2.83
Mayra Dominguez
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
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.