Teams

VALLEY VISTA RC/VVRC COURTS 18AW4.0A-DT

2025 ADULT 18&Over - Daytime · Women 4.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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 →
Schedule2 played
2025-06-06vs SLEEPY HOLLOW 18AW4.0A-DTWon 30
W#1 DoublesSusan Roach / Sandy Harrington vs Victoria Ramirez / Romi Smith7-6, 6-3
W#1 SinglesValerie Fung-A-Ling vs Trupti Haldar6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJudy Miller / Karen Pearson vs Rachel Blatt / Anne Schwaikert6-4, 6-4
2025-04-16vs SLEEPY HOLLOW 18AW4.0A-DTLost 03
L#1 DoublesCheryl Enos / Dolores Schmidt vs Darla Lucas / Victoria Ramirez7-6, 1-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesValerie Fung-A-Ling vs Trupti Haldar6-7, 4-6
L#2 DoublesSandy Harrington / Susan Roach vs Kelly Kassela / Jill D Krimmel5-7, 1-6
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 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 3.49 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.

3.69
Jennifer Grant
published
3.66
Judy Miller
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.66
Janie McCauley
published
3.63
Valerie Fung-A-Ling
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.62
Jeri Feuer
published
3.50
Susan Gwynn
published
3.35
Lee Gove
published
3.35
Dolores Schmidt
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.32
Karen Pearson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Cheryl Enos
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.10
Wendy Schofield
published
Jessie Du
published
Sandy Harrington
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Judy Miller + Susan Gwynn134 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.

Jennifer Grant
14W–13L career · no lines in 2025
8%90%1%
3.69
Judy Miller
6W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
12%87%1%
3.66
Janie McCauley
18W–16L career · no lines in 2025
13%87%1%
3.66
Valerie Fung-A-Ling
11W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
18%81%<1%
3.63
Jeri Feuer
8W–5L career · no lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.62
Susan Gwynn
7W–9L career · no lines in 2025
50%50%<1%
3.50
Lee Gove
4W–5L career · no lines in 2025
85%15%<1%
3.35
Dolores Schmidt
7W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
85%15%<1%
3.35
Karen Pearson
3W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
90%10%<1%
3.32
3.5
Cheryl Enos
0W–2L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Wendy Schofield
10W–13L career · no lines in 2025
23%76%<1%
3.10
Jessie Du
1W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Sandy Harrington
3W–2L career · 2 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.