Teams

SFV - Shot Girls

2025 Adult 18 SFV Spring · SFV 18 & Over - Women 4.0

16 players · average NTRP 3.69 / 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 standings for SFV 18 & Over - Women 4.0 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 3.52 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.

3.83
Teresa Loveland
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.77
Kathryn Speer
published
3.76
Lauri Solano
published
3.74
Margaret Chand
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 14% · published 4
3.74
Patricia Dunn
published
3.72
Paula Evans
published
3.67
Joann Miles
published
3.55
Dorothy Chung
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 20% · published 3.5
3.43
Annie Schwartz
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.42
Elizabeth Hackelton
published
3.36
Peggy Perazzo
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.33
Tricia Kim
published
3.24
Tracy Kuncar
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.23
Wangie Pineda
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.08
Leslie Giammanco
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Jordyn Jaffe
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.

Margaret Chand + Paula Evans8263% games+10.6% vs expected
Teresa Loveland + Patricia Dunn16856% games+7.0% vs expected
Patricia Dunn + Paula Evans7455% games+2.8% vs expected
Lauri Solano + Paula Evans7453% games+2.0% vs expected
Joann Miles + Margaret Chand2354% games+0.8% vs expected
Leslie Giammanco + Wangie Pineda4449% games−3.6% vs expected
Teresa Loveland + Margaret Chand5353% games−3.9% vs expected
Tracy Kuncar + Peggy Perazzo101149% games−4.8% 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.

4
Teresa Loveland
94W–61L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.83
Kathryn Speer
5W–6L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
3.77
Lauri Solano
8W–5L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
3.76
4
Margaret Chand
65W–60L career · 7 lines in 2025
4%93%3%
3.74
Patricia Dunn
22W–18L career · no lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
3.74
Paula Evans
38W–21L career · no lines in 2025
0%<1%>99%
3.72
Joann Miles
3W–9L career · no lines in 2025
12%87%1%
3.67
3.5
Dorothy Chung
92W–32L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%37%63%
3.55
4
Annie Schwartz
144W–179L career · 2 lines in 2025
69%31%<1%
3.43
Elizabeth Hackelton
6W–9L career · no lines in 2025
71%29%<1%
3.42
3.5
Peggy Perazzo
125W–138L career · 6 lines in 2025
1%84%16%
3.36
Tricia Kim
9W–8L career · no lines in 2025
<1%1%99%
3.33
3.5
Tracy Kuncar
79W–85L career · 4 lines in 2025
4%92%3%
3.24
3.5
Wangie Pineda
96W–110L career · 5 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.23
3.5
Leslie Giammanco
88W–83L career · 4 lines in 2025
28%72%<1%
3.08
Jordyn Jaffe
0W–1L career · no 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.