Teams

SD 4.0 Mtn View/ Fairbank

2026 SoCal Fall Doubles- SD WD · SD - Women - 4.0

14 players · average NTRP 3.81 / SAN DIEGO

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 standings13 teams · SD - Women - 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SD 4.0 Coronado TC/ Webster000000
2SD 4.0 Balboa TC/ Davis000000
3SD 4.0 Barnes TC/ Bucky000000
4SD 4.0 Barnes TC/ Gambale000000
5SD 4.0 Mtn View/ Nguyen000000
6SD 4.0 Peninsula TC/ Lightner000000
7SD 4.0 SDTRC/ Kauffman000000
8SD 4.0 SDTRC/ Hanson000000
9SD 4.0 Universiy City RC/ Fitzgerald000000
10SD 4.0 Coronado HS/ Hammond000000
11SD 4.0 Barnes TC/ Carey000000
12SD 4.0 Barnes / Williams000000
13SD 4.0 Mtn View/ Fairbank000000

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 3.56 estimated across 13 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.

3.95
Giana Guerra
published 4
Chigusa Okubo
published 4
3.67
Emi Kanayama
published 4
3.67
3.65
Sara Fairbank
published 4
3.63
3.60
Bea McLellan
published 4
3.57
Kurumi Nishioka
published 3.5
3.55
Paola Romo
published
3.52
Brenda Henriquez
published 3.5
3.51
Haruko Vajda
published 4
3.48
Celina Tiznado
published 3.5
3.39
Rosie Wagner
published 3.5
3.15
Irma Ibarra
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.

Celina Tiznado + Sara Fairbank511658% games+9.8% vs expected
Celina Tiznado + Irma Ibarra7455% games+6.1% vs expected
Chigusa Okubo + Emi Kanayama251653% games−2.1% vs expected
Bea McLellan + Emi Kanayama6551% games−2.9% vs expected
Sara Fairbank + Irma Ibarra111053% games−3.7% vs expected
Bea McLellan + Rosie Wagner61045% games−5.4% vs expected
Rosie Wagner + Chigusa Okubo11043% games−8.0% vs expected
Irma Ibarra + Brenda Henriquez8157% 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.

4
Giana Guerra
51W–42L career · no lines in 2026
<1%63%37%
3.95
4
Chigusa Okubo
55W–55L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
4
Emi Kanayama
85W–63L career · no lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.67
4
Alexandra Chavez Caro
17W–20L career · no lines in 2026
12%87%1%
3.67
4
Sara Fairbank
154W–91L career · no lines in 2026
14%85%1%
3.65
4
Ana Eliza Valencia
1W–3L career · no lines in 2026
19%81%<1%
3.63
4
Bea McLellan
62W–75L career · no lines in 2026
25%75%<1%
3.60
3.5
Kurumi Nishioka
31W–17L career · no lines in 2026
<1%31%69%
3.57
Paola Romo
12W–14L career · no lines in 2026
36%64%<1%
3.55
3.5
Brenda Henriquez
104W–69L career · no lines in 2026
<1%46%54%
3.52
4
Haruko Vajda
165W–125L career · no lines in 2026
48%52%<1%
3.51
3.5
Celina Tiznado
136W–70L career · no lines in 2026
<1%57%43%
3.48
3.5
Rosie Wagner
87W–136L career · no lines in 2026
<1%78%22%
3.39
3.5
Irma Ibarra
94W–84L career · no lines in 2026
14%86%1%
3.15

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.