Teams

MONTE VISTA HS 18MX7.0A

2025 MIXED 18&Over · 18&Over MX7.0

20 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NO. 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 18&Over MX7.0 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 3.26 estimated across 19 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.

4.01
Bryan Wendleton
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.75
Ritesh Bhandari
published
3.75
Chandra Mouli
published 4
3.66
Priyank Saxena
published
3.51
Rachel Falk
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.40
Chad Harrison
published 3.5
3.37
Caroline D Sherbourne
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Deborah Gaisser
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.25
Heather Paquette
published 3.5
3.24
Dana Andrew
published 3.5
3.19
Guru Prasad Acharya
published 3.5
3.17
Brant Moore
published 3.5
3.17
Salvador Labrador
published
3.17
John Boral
published
3.08
2.95
Lalitha Subramanian
published
2.93
Florita Labrador
published 3
2.93
Meilan Liu
published
2.92
Daljeet Singh
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.53
Cindy Choi
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.

Salvador Labrador + Florita Labrador134 matchesnot enough data
Cindy Choi + Bryan Wendleton224 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
Bryan Wendleton
35W–34L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%48%52%
4.01
Ritesh Bhandari
15W–8L career · no lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Chandra Mouli
11W–5L career · no lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.75
Priyank Saxena
8W–10L career · no lines in 2025
11%89%<1%
3.66
Rachel Falk
17W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%48%52%
3.51
3.5
Chad Harrison
5W–18L career · no lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
3.40
3.5
Caroline D Sherbourne
9W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%84%16%
3.37
3.5
Deborah Gaisser
1W–0L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Heather Paquette
20W–29L career · no lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Dana Andrew
10W–23L career · no lines in 2025
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Guru Prasad Acharya
11W–10L career · no lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.19
3.5
Brant Moore
11W–19L career · no lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.17
Salvador Labrador
1W–13L career · no lines in 2025
99%1%<1%
3.17
John Boral
20W–11L career · no lines in 2025
10%89%1%
3.17
Pathanjali Krishnasamy
8W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%27%73%
3.08
Lalitha Subramanian
10W–11L career · no lines in 2025
<1%66%34%
2.95
3
Florita Labrador
69W–72L career · no lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
2.93
Meilan Liu
10W–22L career · no lines in 2025
<1%71%28%
2.93
3.5
Daljeet Singh
3W–25L career · 4 lines in 2025
73%27%<1%
2.92
3
Cindy Choi
8W–24L career · type S · no lines in 2025
40%60%<1%
2.53

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.