Teams

SGV Love All-Sugihara-Claremont Club/SA2

2025 Winter Team Singles · SGV - Women 3.0

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
L#1 SinglesMegan Eme vs Tina Lu0-6, 1-2
L#2 SinglesSue Gleckman vs Nalini Arora3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 SinglesMAY-MAY SUGIHARA vs Deborah Beveridge6-2, 6-2
L#1 SinglesSharon Cuff vs Angela Leung6-7, 4-6
L#2 SinglesMegan Eme vs Sandi Cun0-6, 1-6
L#3 SinglesSue Gleckman vs Alena Ananyeva2-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesSharon Cuff vs Jennifer Sung0-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesMegan Eme vs Linda Lopez1-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesSue Gleckman vs Veronica Lopez4-6, 5-7
W#1 SinglesSharon Cuff vs Kimberly Ndombe4-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 SinglesPatricia Ash vs Tina Lu3-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesBetsy Weinberger vs Kiera Nowacki3-6, 2-6
W#3 SinglesMary Herbers Eme vs Sandi Cun6-2, 6-3
W#1 SinglesPatricia Ash vs Linda Lopez6-1, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesSUSAN PEDERSON vs Jane Lee7-5, 6-2
W#3 SinglesMegan Eme vs Veronica Lopez6-7, 7-5, 1-0
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 SGV - Women 3.0 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 2.73 estimated across 8 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.

3.03
Mariana Glovsky
published
2.96
Mary Herbers Eme
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.77
Patricia Ash
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
2.75
Megan Eme
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 25% · published
2.74
SUSAN PEDERSON
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
2.59
Sue Gleckman
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.57
Betsy Weinberger
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.40
MAY-MAY SUGIHARA
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
Sharon Cuff
usually #1 Singles 100% · 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.

Mariana Glovsky + Mary Herbers Eme303 matchesnot enough data
Mary Herbers Eme + Patricia Ash213 matchesnot enough data
Betsy Weinberger + Patricia Ash303 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.

Mariana Glovsky
7W–0L career · no lines in 2025
<1%41%59%
3.03
3
Mary Herbers Eme
62W–58L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%62%38%
2.96
Patricia Ash
12W–8L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
2.77
Megan Eme
5W–10L career · 4 lines in 2025
3%95%3%
2.75
SUSAN PEDERSON
9W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
3%94%2%
2.74
Sue Gleckman
1W–6L career · 3 lines in 2025
24%76%<1%
2.59
3
Betsy Weinberger
8W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
28%71%<1%
2.57
MAY-MAY SUGIHARA
4W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
78%22%<1%
2.40
Sharon Cuff
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.