Teams

SGV Ace Kickers-Hawkins-Claremont Club/SU11

2026 SoCal Doubles 18 & Over - San Gabriel Valley · SGV - Women 3.5

15 players · average NTRP 3.33 / 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 standings9 teams · SGV - Women 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SGV Queens of the Court-Yu-Arroyo Seco/SU4000000
2SGV Ball Hogs-Yip-Arroyo Seco/ SU2000000
3SGV Tennis Addicts- Tsai-Arroyo HS/SU8000000
4SGV Chow Fun- Chow-Arcadia-SA11000000
5SGV FLoBS-Galvagni-Scholl CYN/SU8000000
6SGV Spinners-Hegelund-Flint Cyn/SA12000000
7SGV Canyon Rollers-Shimizu-Freemont Park/SU000000
8SGV Ace Kickers-Hawkins-Claremont Club/SU11000000
9SGV Sloppy Topspin-Higuera-Downey HS/SA 8000000

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.09 estimated across 15 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.

3.36
Kathryn Sheehan
published
3.33
Anne Neal
published 3.5
3.27
Raylynn Roland
published
3.22
Shaheen Plunier
published
3.17
Dana Bailey
published 3.5
3.15
3.11
Kerri Munson
published 3.5
3.05
Linda Kronseder
published 3.5
3.01
Lisa Hawkins
published
2.98
Johanna Bentson
published
2.97
Vanessa Kettering
published
2.96
Jill Mastroluca
published 3.5
2.96
Susan Cardona
published 3
2.94
Mary Herbers Eme
published 3
2.94
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.

Kerri Munson + Charlotte Pereira Reisch6550% games+6.9% vs expected
Anne Neal + Charlotte Pereira Reisch5453% games+3.2% vs expected
Lisa Hawkins + Kimberly Albright6060% games+2.2% vs expected
Kerri Munson + Jill Mastroluca466546% games−2.4% vs expected
Linda Kronseder + Anne Neal8647% gamesnot enough data
Anne Neal + Kerri Munson6550% gamesnot enough data
Linda Kronseder + Kerri Munson5449% gamesnot enough data
Linda Kronseder + Charlotte Pereira Reisch3348% 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.

Kathryn Sheehan
2W–1L career · no lines in 2026
1%84%16%
3.36
3.5
Anne Neal
72W–71L career · no lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.33
Raylynn Roland
7W–5L career · no lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Shaheen Plunier
6W–8L career · no lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Dana Bailey
2W–6L career · no lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.17
3.5
Charlotte Pereira Reisch
95W–94L career · no lines in 2026
14%86%1%
3.15
3.5
Kerri Munson
129W–137L career · no lines in 2026
22%78%<1%
3.11
3.5
Linda Kronseder
50W–96L career · type A · no lines in 2026
37%63%<1%
3.05
Lisa Hawkins
15W–10L career · no lines in 2026
<1%48%52%
3.01
Johanna Bentson
21W–17L career · no lines in 2026
<1%56%44%
2.98
Vanessa Kettering
8W–8L career · no lines in 2026
<1%57%43%
2.97
3.5
Jill Mastroluca
87W–121L career · type A · no lines in 2026
60%40%<1%
2.96
3
Susan Cardona
35W–34L career · no lines in 2026
<1%62%38%
2.96
3
Mary Herbers Eme
62W–58L career · no lines in 2026
<1%66%34%
2.94
3
Kimberly Albright
95W–87L career · no lines in 2026
<1%66%34%
2.94

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.