Teams

IE-MTC-Shelter

2024 So Cal Mixed Doubles Tri-Level - IE · Mixed Tri-Level 6.0

14 players · average NTRP 3.70 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2024-10-27vs IE-RCC-LiLost 01
L#1 DoublesRebecca Cloyd / Renzo Rodriguez vs Heidi Schuler / Hong Ye3-6, 2-6
2024-10-20vs IE-CCCCWon 10
W#2 DoublesDoug van Soest / Andrea Van Soest vs Steve Richardson / Cristina Hamlin2-6, 7-6, 1-0
2024-10-12vs IE-LLW-Andulka-Nutty Mix-UngeheuerLost 01
L#1 DoublesRenzo Rodriguez / Rebecca Cloyd vs Christopher Enciso / Ilse Ungeheuer4-6, 5-7
2024-09-21vs IE-RCC-LiWon 20
W#1 DoublesRebecca Cloyd / Renzo Rodriguez vs Minglu Ding / Cindy Ziqing Lin6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDoug van Soest / Andrea Van Soest vs Yibo Gu / Mallory Whyte6-1, 6-2
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 Mixed Tri-Level 6.0 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 3.29 estimated across 11 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.

3.74
Rebecca Cloyd
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.60
Kelsey Cane
published
3.60
Judy Henning
published
3.58
Andrea Van Soest
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.41
Doug van Soest
published 3.5
3.27
Elizabeth Bentley
published 3.5
3.25
David Duncan
published 3.5
3.22
Mary Ann Neder
published
3.00
Jeff Cane
published
2.77
Stacy Westfall
published
2.74
Jennivieve Randolph
published
Jeanne Shelter
published
Mark Bentley
published
Mike Deluca
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.

Doug van Soest + Andrea Van Soest044 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
Rebecca Cloyd
92W–94L career · 3 lines in 2024
3%94%2%
3.74
Kelsey Cane
0W–4L career · no lines in 2024
21%79%<1%
3.60
Judy Henning
3W–5L career · no lines in 2024
23%77%<1%
3.60
4
Andrea Van Soest
33W–38L career · type A · 2 lines in 2024
28%72%<1%
3.58
3.5
Doug van Soest
2W–7L career · no lines in 2024
<1%75%25%
3.41
3.5
Elizabeth Bentley
6W–7L career · no lines in 2024
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
David Duncan
7W–10L career · no lines in 2024
3%95%3%
3.25
Mary Ann Neder
1W–4L career · no lines in 2024
98%2%<1%
3.22
Jeff Cane
4W–5L career · no lines in 2024
49%51%<1%
3.00
Stacy Westfall
9W–10L career · no lines in 2024
2%94%4%
2.77
Jennivieve Randolph
7W–11L career · no lines in 2024
3%94%2%
2.74
Jeanne Shelter
0W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Mark Bentley
0W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Mike Deluca
4W–5L career · no lines in 2024
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.