Teams

BC - WestEnd/JulieMazor

2022 SOCAL Doubles - Beach Cities · BC Women - 3.5

18 players · average NTRP 3.45 / 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 →
Schedule2 played
2022-11-13vs BC - MCC/AmySchmargenWon 10
W#1 DoublesKaren Chan / Yuko Dundas vs Anne Gumm / Maricel Rocha7-6, 4-6, 1-0
2022-10-16vs BC - ErnieHowlett/NormaIskenderianLost 01
L#1 DoublesYuko Dundas / Karen Chan vs Tara Aviel / Judy Avancena6-7, 6-7
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 BC 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 3.15 estimated across 14 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.

3.62
Tomoko Shimoda
published 3.5
3.42
Angela Landoch
published 3.5
3.33
Yuko Dundas
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.28
Kim Silvera
published
3.26
Cindy Monticue
published 3.5
Edwina Klein
published 3.5
3.20
Hazel Evans
published 3.5
3.13
3.12
Julie Mazor
published
3.03
Marie Bald
published
2.98
Paulette Mashaka
published
2.98
Maria Shekhovtsova
published
2.96
Joyce Flood
published
2.95
Cindy Mularz
published 3.5
2.78
Deborah Hurwicz
published 3
Karen Chan
published
Rosana Fernandes
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.

Marie Bald + Cindy Monticue1545% games−8.7% vs expected
Yuko Dundas + Tomoko Shimoda314 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.

3.5
Tomoko Shimoda
89W–60L career · no lines in 2022
<1%18%82%
3.62
3.5
Angela Landoch
3W–10L career · type S · no lines in 2022
<1%74%26%
3.42
3.5
Yuko Dundas
96W–58L career · 5 lines in 2022
1%90%10%
3.33
Kim Silvera
2W–2L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Cindy Monticue
3W–9L career · no lines in 2022
2%95%3%
3.26
3.5
Bernadette Straatsma
0W–1L career · type S · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Edwina Klein
0W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Hazel Evans
7W–9L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.20
3.5
Brenda Patron Kodani
54W–46L career · no lines in 2022
16%83%<1%
3.13
Julie Mazor
9W–5L career · no lines in 2022
18%81%<1%
3.12
Marie Bald
1W–11L career · no lines in 2022
41%59%<1%
3.03
Paulette Mashaka
3W–11L career · no lines in 2022
56%44%<1%
2.98
Maria Shekhovtsova
3W–4L career · no lines in 2022
57%43%<1%
2.98
Joyce Flood
3W–13L career · no lines in 2022
63%37%<1%
2.96
3.5
Cindy Mularz
18W–16L career · no lines in 2022
64%36%<1%
2.95
3
Deborah Hurwicz
4W–12L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%5%
2.78
Karen Chan
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Rosana Fernandes
0W–1L career · no lines in 2022
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.