Teams

SGV Ballers-Peng-Scholl /SA1

2025 Adult Division - 18 & Over San Gabriel Valley · SGV - Women 4.5

23 players · average NTRP 4.38 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-07-06vs SoCal/Wang/18&Over4.5FLost 03
L#1 DoublesJasmine Dai / Roselle Paskus vs Stephanie Ellis / Lauren Nicole Finke1-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesLaura del Beccaro vs Diana Angell2-6, 3-5
L#2 DoublesKarla Garcia / Deann McCormick vs Tricia Guinto / Jennifer Portillo2-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesDaniela Chung / Susan Miller vs Shirley Fong / Julia Sargsyan1-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJasmine Dai / Laura del Beccaro vs Emma Silber / Gloria Geller6-7, 4-6
L#1 DoublesRoselle Paskus / Jennie Speciale vs Gloria Geller / Roseann DeRosa1-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#3 DoublesDebbie Sierra / Caridad Coto vs Julie Kanjanapangka / Shirley Fong1-6, 4-6
2025-06-15vs SoCal/Wang/18&Over4.5FLost 01
L#3 DoublesDeann McCormick / Penapa Frick vs Christine Chen / Takiko Phinizy5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2025-06-08vs SoCal/Wang/18&Over4.5FLost 02
L#1 SinglesLaura del Beccaro vs Chi Rauen2-6, 5-6
L#2 DoublesDaniela Chung / Jennifer Lee vs Tricia Guinto / Meng-Chieh Lee4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesDebbie Sierra / Lorna Kim vs Amy Jones / Meera Prasad0-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#2 SinglesLaura del Beccaro vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesDaniela Chung / Susan Miller vs Jennifer Lichtman / Joanna Morley6-2, 7-5
2025-05-31vs SoCal/Wang/18&Over4.5FLost 01
L#2 DoublesAlison Harma / Ami Belcher vs Cindy Shin / Jennifer Portillo4-6, 6-7
2025-04-19Won 10
W#3 DoublesDaniela Chung / Deann McCormick vs N/A6-0, 6-0
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 4.5 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 3.97 estimated across 20 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.

4.39
Daniela Chung
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.29
Laura del Beccaro
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 4.5
Carrie Gan
published 4.5
4.21
Sandy Brathwaite
published
4.13
Chloe Kishel
published 4.5
4.07
Roselle Paskus
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.06
Mary Soto
published
4.05
Marguerite Brook
published
4.05
Jasmine Dai
published
4.04
Jennie Speciale
published
4.03
Alison Harma
published 4.5
4.02
Caridad Coto
published 4.5
3.96
Deann McCormick
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.96
Jing Lin
published
3.94
Ami Belcher
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.82
Debbie Sierra
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.77
Penapa Frick
published
3.71
Skylar Sabetta
published
3.68
Cindi Carter
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.68
Lorna Kim
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.51
Karla Garcia
published
Loretta Peng
published
Skylar Brathwaite
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.

Debbie Sierra + Cindi Carter3647% games+0.4% vs expected
Lorna Kim + Debbie Sierra41044% games+0.3% vs expected
Lorna Kim + Cindi Carter16654% gamesnot enough data
Lorna Kim + Deann McCormick4161% gamesnot enough data
Penapa Frick + Cindi Carter123 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.

4.5
Daniela Chung
65W–27L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%78%21%
4.39
4.5
Laura del Beccaro
68W–44L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
4.29
4.5
Carrie Gan
0W–2L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Sandy Brathwaite
4W–0L career · no lines in 2025
6%92%2%
4.21
4.5
Chloe Kishel
8W–10L career · no lines in 2025
18%81%<1%
4.13
4.5
Roselle Paskus
101W–105L career · 2 lines in 2025
32%68%<1%
4.07
Mary Soto
3W–5L career · no lines in 2025
33%67%<1%
4.06
Marguerite Brook
3W–1L career · no lines in 2025
35%65%<1%
4.05
Jasmine Dai
8W–5L career · no lines in 2025
36%64%<1%
4.05
Jennie Speciale
3W–13L career · no lines in 2025
39%61%<1%
4.04
4.5
Alison Harma
1W–6L career · no lines in 2025
42%58%<1%
4.03
4.5
Caridad Coto
1W–14L career · no lines in 2025
44%56%<1%
4.02
4.5
Deann McCormick
102W–101L career · 3 lines in 2025
60%40%<1%
3.96
Jing Lin
6W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%62%38%
3.96
4.5
Ami Belcher
60W–89L career · 1 line in 2025
67%33%<1%
3.94
4
Debbie Sierra
34W–45L career · type A · 2 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.82
Penapa Frick
12W–9L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
3.77
Skylar Sabetta
2W–3L career · no lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.71
4
Cindi Carter
150W–114L career · 3 lines in 2025
10%89%1%
3.68
4
Lorna Kim
210W–162L career · 3 lines in 2025
10%89%1%
3.68
Karla Garcia
2W–18L career · no lines in 2025
<1%47%53%
3.51
Loretta Peng
0W–2L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Skylar Brathwaite
1W–0L career · no 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.