Teams

LA - WeHo Slicers 3.5

2026 SoCal Doubles - LA · LA - Women 3.5

17 players · average NTRP 3.35 / 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 standings13 teams · LA - Women 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1LA - Queen Anne 3.5W000000
2LA - Santa Monica Tennis Collective000000
3LA - Backhanded Compliments 3.5000000
4LA - Cheviot Hills000000
5LA - Femme Bandits000000
6LA - Canyon Coyotes Vermont000000
7LA - Canyon Coyotes Riverside000000
8LA - Lucky at Love000000
9LA - Downtown Aces 3.5000000
10LA - WeHo Slicers 3.5000000
11LA - Griffin Club 3.5W000000
12LA - PrimeTime Too000000
13Fine Young Can of Balls000000

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 3.24 estimated across 17 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.

3.75
Katie Lagen
published 3.5
3.66
Lisa Haroutunian
published
3.65
Amanda Kain
published 3.5
3.54
Kate Davies
published 3.5
3.31
Harriet Fraser
published
3.28
Charlotte Greaney
published 3.5
3.27
Claire Greaney
published 3.5
3.24
Michelle Tesoro
published
3.20
Uyen Chu
published 3.5
3.19
Nataliya Padilla
published 3.5
3.16
Kathleen Hipps
published 3.5
3.12
Keum Ko
published 3.5
3.12
Sheba ZamanZadeh
published 3
3.06
Nichole Burston
published 3
2.99
Alexandra Faeh
published 3
2.91
Doree Shafrir
published 3
2.71
Rachael Alberti
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.

Sheba ZamanZadeh + Rachael Alberti6066% games+17.0% vs expected
Katie Lagen + Kate Davies9172% games+15.2% vs expected
Harriet Fraser + Kate Davies5068% games+12.0% vs expected
Amanda Kain + Kate Davies7162% games+7.7% vs expected
Amanda Kain + Uyen Chu25861% games+3.9% vs expected
Harriet Fraser + Nataliya Padilla4154% games+3.0% vs expected
Sheba ZamanZadeh + Doree Shafrir4249% games+2.8% vs expected
Nataliya Padilla + Kate Davies4353% games−1.0% vs expected
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
Katie Lagen
68W–18L career · no lines in 2026
<1%4%96%
3.75
Lisa Haroutunian
60W–14L career · no lines in 2026
<1%13%87%
3.66
3.5
Amanda Kain
117W–35L career · no lines in 2026
<1%14%86%
3.65
3.5
Kate Davies
53W–40L career · no lines in 2026
<1%38%62%
3.54
Harriet Fraser
17W–12L career · no lines in 2026
1%90%8%
3.31
3.5
Charlotte Greaney
6W–4L career · no lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.28
3.5
Claire Greaney
2W–2L career · type S · no lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Michelle Tesoro
25W–17L career · no lines in 2026
<1%4%96%
3.24
3.5
Uyen Chu
54W–19L career · no lines in 2026
8%91%2%
3.20
3.5
Nataliya Padilla
60W–77L career · no lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.19
3.5
Kathleen Hipps
78W–38L career · no lines in 2026
12%87%1%
3.16
3.5
Keum Ko
109W–69L career · no lines in 2026
20%80%<1%
3.12
3
Sheba ZamanZadeh
76W–54L career · no lines in 2026
<1%20%80%
3.12
3
Nichole Burston
44W–38L career · no lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
3.06
3
Alexandra Faeh
11W–6L career · no lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
2.99
3
Doree Shafrir
93W–72L career · no lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
2.91
Rachael Alberti
17W–4L career · no lines in 2026
7%91%2%
2.71

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.