Teams

Rally Rascals

2024 Adult 55 and Over League · 6.0 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.27 / OAHU

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2024-05-05vs Happy Happy Hour!Won 21
W#1 DoublesKaren Howes / Becky Miller vs Phyllis Klein / Iris Tomita6-3, 6-2
L#2 DoublesJan Matsuura / Cheryl Hay vs Jamie Pang / Kathy Kaneshige6-3, 2-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesYoko Naka / Pamela Jinnohara vs Cyd Nishino / Charlotte Loo6-3, 6-4
2024-04-28vs Lucky ShotsWon 30
W#1 DoublesJacqueline Ornellas / Darlene Chang vs Margaret Rufo / PJ Ellison6-4, 7-6
W#2 DoublesSumi Matsumiya / Sharon Vidal vs Rumiko Wong / Miho May6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesKaren Howes / Becky Miller vs Charlotte Hashimoto / Susan Shingle6-0, 6-0
2024-04-25vs Dig DeepWon 30
W#1 DoublesSumi Matsumiya / Yoko Naka vs Maureen O'Guin / Wylie Nash6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesEko Hasegawa / Pamela Jinnohara vs Lisa Gentry / Stacy Ray6-0, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJanis Kanegawa / Becky Miller vs Ann Gardetto / Rennie Faith6-2, 6-3
2024-04-21vs No BagelsWon 30
W#1 DoublesJacqueline Ornellas / Sharon Vidal vs Renee S / Valerie Lee6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesYoko Naka / Wendy Kimi vs Lori Loo / Kimmy Goldsmith4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesEko Hasegawa / Darlene Chang vs Joanne Sakamaki / Vickie Cheng6-0, 6-2
2024-04-09vs Alley CatsWon 21
W#1 DoublesSumi Matsumiya / Sharon Vidal vs Lynette Furukawa / Diane Nakahodo6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesWendy Kimi / Pamela Jinnohara vs Rae Tadaki / Allison Gough6-4, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJanis Kanegawa / Cheryl Hay vs Sonavie Ong / Linda Levine6-4, 6-1
2024-03-24vs Dare DoublesWon 21
W#1 DoublesWendy Kimi / Yoko Naka vs Kathleen Dinman / Barbara Farr6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJacqueline Ornellas / Eko Hasegawa vs Phyllis Tsukayama / Helen Ramos6-0, 6-1
L#3 DoublesKaren Howes / Cheryl Hay vs Cindy Siok / Fay Sakamoto3-6, 1-6
2024-03-17vs High FivesWon 30
W#1 DoublesDarlene Chang / Sharon Vidal vs Diane Takara / Saima Makhdoom6-3, 6-0
W#2 DoublesWendy Kimi / Jacqueline Ornellas vs Rosemary Lau / Gwen Okahara6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesJan Matsuura / Cheryl Hay vs KARIN OKINAGA / Debbie Aiu6-3, 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 6.0 Women 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 3.08 estimated across 12 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.

3.33
Sumi Matsumiya
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.32
Karen Howes
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.25
Jacqueline Ornellas
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Eko Hasegawa
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.21
Sharon Vidal
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
3.16
Janis Kanegawa
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.14
Yoko Naka
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.08
Becky Miller
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
3.02
Jan Matsuura
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.99
Cheryl Hay
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.97
Wendy Kimi
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.83
Darlene Chang
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.65
Pamela Jinnohara
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
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.

Cheryl Hay + Becky Miller5165% games+5.7% vs expected
Sharon Vidal + Sumi Matsumiya5163% gamesnot enough data
Jan Matsuura + Sharon Vidal5070% gamesnot enough data
Pamela Jinnohara + Darlene Chang314 matchesnot enough data
Wendy Kimi + Cheryl Hay213 matchesnot enough data
Wendy Kimi + Darlene Chang213 matchesnot enough data
Jan Matsuura + Janis Kanegawa123 matchesnot enough data
Pamela Jinnohara + Sharon Vidal123 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
Sumi Matsumiya
61W–47L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%89%10%
3.33
3.5
Karen Howes
93W–78L career · 8 lines in 2024
1%91%8%
3.32
3.5
Jacqueline Ornellas
34W–36L career · 4 lines in 2024
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Eko Hasegawa
31W–13L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Sharon Vidal
117W–62L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%5%95%
3.21
3.5
Janis Kanegawa
58W–78L career · 8 lines in 2024
10%89%<1%
3.16
3.5
Yoko Naka
43W–33L career · 4 lines in 2024
14%86%<1%
3.14
3
Becky Miller
42W–15L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%27%73%
3.08
3.5
Jan Matsuura
80W–76L career · 6 lines in 2024
43%57%<1%
3.02
3
Cheryl Hay
49W–16L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%53%47%
2.99
3
Wendy Kimi
81W–34L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%59%41%
2.97
3
Darlene Chang
93W–86L career · 3 lines in 2024
1%90%10%
2.83
3
Pamela Jinnohara
45W–69L career · 3 lines in 2024
12%88%<1%
2.65

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.