Teams

SGV Live Oaks Ladies - Perry-Live Oaks/SA2

2022 SoCal Doubles 18 & Over - San Gabriel Valley · SGV - Women 4.0

10 players · average NTRP 3.92 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
W#1 DoublesStephanie Perry / Jessica Park vs Julia Campbell / Theona Zhordania7-5, 6-4
2022-11-13vs SGV Dare Doubles-Hofstad-WN/ SU8Split 11
L#1 DoublesStephanie Perry / Kasia Chmielewski vs Cara Hofstad / Franciz Bragg3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAram Hamidi / Amy Newhall vs Jina Lee / Adrienne Beauvois6-3, 6-2
W#1 DoublesAlison Latiolait / Stephanie Perry vs Alma Banuelos / Noelle Aloe6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesAram Hamidi / Amy Newhall vs Elyse Gainor / Jacquelin Hoppenjans6-0, 6-2
W#1 DoublesStephanie Perry / Amy Newhall vs Mae Huey / Regina Gov6-2, 6-0
W#1 DoublesLaura Ferguson / Stephanie Perry vs Carol Choy / Loretta Peng7-6, 6-3
L#3 DoublesAmy Newhall / Dianne Ciulla vs Raha Nazer / Laurel Eriksen4-6, 7-6, 0-1
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 4.0 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 3.62 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.

3.86
Stephanie Perry
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.86
Katie Tong
published
3.84
Amy Newhall
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.79
3.74
Kasia Chmielewski
published
3.71
Ann Messana
published 4
3.57
Sandra Manion
published
3.42
Aram Hamidi
published 4
3.38
Teri McClure
published
3.00
Dianne Ciulla
published 3.5
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.

Ann Messana + Amy Newhall4155% games+3.7% vs expected
Stephanie Perry + Amy Newhall8458% games−3.1% vs expected
Kasia Chmielewski + Stephanie Perry3545% games−5.7% vs expected
Ann Messana + Stephanie Perry5161% gamesnot enough data
Kasia Chmielewski + Christyne Burdett213 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Perry + Sandra Manion303 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Perry + Katie Tong213 matchesnot enough data
Stephanie Perry + Christyne Burdett303 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
Stephanie Perry
184W–106L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%85%15%
3.86
Katie Tong
19W–8L career · no lines in 2022
<1%86%14%
3.86
4
Amy Newhall
126W–55L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%89%10%
3.84
4
Christyne Burdett
6W–4L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.79
Kasia Chmielewski
9W–12L career · no lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.74
4
Ann Messana
6W–6L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.71
Sandra Manion
6W–10L career · no lines in 2022
30%70%<1%
3.57
4
Aram Hamidi
1W–5L career · no lines in 2022
72%28%<1%
3.42
Teri McClure
15W–12L career · no lines in 2022
<1%81%19%
3.38
3.5
Dianne Ciulla
0W–6L career · no lines in 2022
50%50%<1%
3.00

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.