Teams

SFV - Chicks With Sticks

2025 Adult 18 SFV Spring · SFV 18 & Over - Women 3.5

18 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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 →

Flight standings for SFV 18 & Over - 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 3.25 estimated across 16 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.

3.55
Dorothy Chung
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 20% · published 3.5
3.41
Jenny Ulch
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.36
Peggy Perazzo
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.33
Tricia Kim
published
3.27
MISSY LOPEZ
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.26
TANIA JANICEK
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.25
Sara Gabriel
published
3.24
Tracy Kuncar
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.24
Sara Lavalle
published
3.23
Cheryl Hughart
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.23
Wangie Pineda
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.18
Kristine Puno
published
3.16
Sara Giammanco
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.15
Natie MacDonald
published
3.12
Marisela Momary
published
3.08
Leslie Giammanco
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Faith Abt
published
Jacque Clendennen
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.

MISSY LOPEZ + Jenny Ulch231058% games+5.8% vs expected
Leslie Giammanco + Sara Giammanco242451% games−0.1% vs expected
Leslie Giammanco + Wangie Pineda4449% games−3.6% vs expected
Tracy Kuncar + Cheryl Hughart13753% games−3.6% vs expected
Tracy Kuncar + Peggy Perazzo101149% games−4.8% vs expected
MISSY LOPEZ + Peggy Perazzo101150% games−5.0% vs expected
Cheryl Hughart + Wangie Pineda7554% gamesnot enough data
Cheryl Hughart + Peggy Perazzo9258% gamesnot 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
Dorothy Chung
92W–32L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%37%63%
3.55
3.5
Jenny Ulch
70W–36L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%73%26%
3.41
3.5
Peggy Perazzo
125W–138L career · 6 lines in 2025
1%84%16%
3.36
Tricia Kim
9W–8L career · no lines in 2025
<1%1%99%
3.33
3.5
MISSY LOPEZ
80W–67L career · 3 lines in 2025
3%92%5%
3.27
3.5
TANIA JANICEK
102W–89L career · 3 lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.26
Sara Gabriel
3W–0L career · no lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.25
3.5
Tracy Kuncar
79W–85L career · 4 lines in 2025
4%92%3%
3.24
Sara Lavalle
9W–4L career · no lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.24
3.5
Cheryl Hughart
121W–97L career · 2 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.23
3.5
Wangie Pineda
96W–110L career · 5 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.23
Kristine Puno
1W–3L career · no lines in 2025
10%89%1%
3.18
3.5
Sara Giammanco
35W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
12%87%1%
3.16
Natie MacDonald
1W–2L career · no lines in 2025
15%85%1%
3.15
Marisela Momary
11W–11L career · no lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.12
3.5
Leslie Giammanco
88W–83L career · 4 lines in 2025
28%72%<1%
3.08
Faith Abt
1W–2L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Jacque Clendennen
2W–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.