Teams

SD 3.5 The Slice is Right -BTC/ Tran

2024 SoCal Fall Doubles SD WE · SD Women 3.5

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SAN DIEGO

View scouting list →
Schedule10 played
2024-12-08vs SD 3.5 CTC-CHS/ LeshLost 12
L#1 DoublesAmelia Desiderio / Annie Kyle vs Yvonne Bentle / Erika Temple3-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesMarisa Alvarado / Monica La Crue vs Elizabeth Dahlgren / Jennifer Vernallis4-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesSuzanne Pham / Hannah Greenwood vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2024-11-24vs SDNC 3.5 WE KCP/ NelsonWon 20
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Pham / Leah Diehl vs Suzanne E Shupe / Heidi Dalvie6-7, 6-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMonica La Crue / Marisa Alvarado vs Robyn Rice / Junli Feng6-3, 6-4
2024-11-03vs SD 3.5 Mtn View/ FairbankSplit 11
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Pham / Clara Tan vs Sara Fairbank / Irma Ibarra6-3, 7-6
L#2 DoublesAmelia Desiderio / Annie Kyle vs Luisa Garcia de la Cabada / Lizette Ferrero4-6, 4-6
2024-10-27vs SD 3.5 SDTRC/ KauffmanLost 02
L#1 DoublesViktoriia Belonogova / Clara Tan vs Avelina Kauffman / Kim Schwab3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesMonica La Crue / Amy Tran vs Alisa Le / Kelly Wilson4-6, 5-7
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Pham / Clara Tan vs Lisa Mallory / Jacinthe Pare7-6, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesHayley Moore / Marisa Alvarado vs Anna Brigham / Pat St Onge0-6, 1-6
2024-10-13vs SD 3.5 SDTRC/ BolelliWon 20
W#1 DoublesClara Tan / Leah Diehl vs Tracy Skaddan / Marva Gesell6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesAmy Tran / Viktoriia Belonogova vs Klaudia Kapinos / Ruth Hoffman6-3, 6-0
2024-10-06vs SD WE LLW 3.5 Penn Pals/ NguyenLost 03
L#1 DoublesClara Tan / Suzanne Pham vs Sarah Eade / Karen Nguyen3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesLeah Diehl / Annie Kyle vs Dana Davalos / Patricia HOLMAN2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesAmy Tran / Viktoriia Belonogova vs Elizabeth McLean / Lorena Whiteside3-6, 4-6
2024-09-22vs SD 3.5 CTC-CHS/ LeshLost 12
L#1 DoublesAnnie Kyle / Amelia Desiderio vs Yvonne Hwang / Sue Taylor0-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesViktoriia Belonogova / Rose Harris-Makinen vs Nabeelah Khan / Erika Temple6-3, 2-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesMonica La Crue / Hayley Moore vs Connie Kocherga / Meagan McKissick6-3, 5-7, 1-0
2024-09-15vs SD 3.5 Mtn View/ HernandezSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLeah Diehl / Amy Tran vs Erika Lopez / Madeleine West4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesSuzanne Pham / Clara Tan vs Brenda Henriquez / Tomoko Hoffman6-2, 6-3
2024-09-08vs SD 3.5 Peninsula/ WoodSplit 11
W#1 DoublesAnnie Kyle / Amelia Desiderio vs Erica Miller / Julie Wood7-6, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesClara Tan / Viktoriia Belonogova vs Karen Sahd / Shelly Patriquin4-6, 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 SD Women 3.5 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 3.23 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.

3.51
Leah Diehl
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.45
Annie Kyle
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.44
Suzanne Pham
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.30
Viktoriia Belonogova
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Amy Tran
published 3.5
3.24
Clara Tan
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.23
Monica La Crue
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.21
Hayley Moore
published
3.15
Amelia Desiderio
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.94
Marisa Alvarado
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.82
Madeleine Norris
published
Hannah Greenwood
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.

Marisa Alvarado + Monica La Crue12459% games+7.2% vs expected
Hayley Moore + Monica La Crue2346% games+2.0% vs expected
Clara Tan + Suzanne Pham10553% games−3.7% vs expected
Annie Kyle + Viktoriia Belonogova6160% gamesnot enough data
Amelia Desiderio + Annie Kyle1440% gamesnot enough data
Hayley Moore + Annie Kyle224 matchesnot enough data
Amelia Desiderio + Monica La Crue213 matchesnot enough data
Leah Diehl + Clara Tan303 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
Leah Diehl
61W–51L career · 4 lines in 2024
48%52%<1%
3.51
3.5
Annie Kyle
18W–12L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%64%36%
3.45
3.5
Suzanne Pham
49W–28L career · 6 lines in 2024
<1%67%33%
3.44
3.5
Viktoriia Belonogova
70W–33L career · 9 lines in 2024
1%90%8%
3.30
3.5
Amy Tran
1W–0L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Clara Tan
53W–43L career · 7 lines in 2024
4%93%3%
3.24
3.5
Monica La Crue
57W–33L career · 8 lines in 2024
5%92%3%
3.23
Hayley Moore
5W–6L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
3.21
3.5
Amelia Desiderio
7W–14L career · 4 lines in 2024
15%84%1%
3.15
3
Marisa Alvarado
49W–36L career · 7 lines in 2024
<1%67%33%
2.94
Madeleine Norris
1W–2L career · no lines in 2024
1%89%10%
2.82
Hannah Greenwood
1W–1L 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.