← Teams

SHC-Murphy/Vipond

2019 Adult 18 & Over · 3.5 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.64 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.43 estimated across 7 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.

3.92
Andrea Findley
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.84
Kayleen Mendenhall
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.48
Amy Murphy
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.32
Tami Socolofsky
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.19
Rozita Walsh
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.14
Monica Christensen
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.13
Kim Christensen
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
—
Gina Meyer
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 0
Results12 ties
2019-07-13Lost 0–1
L#2 DoublesKathryn Eddy / Andrea Findley vs Sarah Yu / Courtney Storrs6-3, 6-4
2019-07-12Won 1–0
W#2 DoublesAndrea Findley / Kathryn Eddy vs Susie Garland / Ellen Mulherin6-1, 6-2
2019-04-13Lost 1–3
W#1 DoublesAndrea Findley / Kathryn Eddy vs Dolores Corley / Bin He6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesKayleen Mendenhall / Nancy Stecher vs Teresa Sullivan / Kristie Leake6-2, 7-5
L#2 SinglesKim Christensen vs Lyann Nguyen7-6, 6-1
L#3 DoublesRozita Walsh / Monica Christensen vs Seungja Shin / Aleli Siruno6-3, 6-0
2019-04-12Won 1–0
W#1 DoublesAmy Murphy / Kayleen Mendenhall vs May Albano / Leah Buxman6-4, 7-5
2019-03-16Split 1–1
W#1 DoublesKayleen Mendenhall / Amy Murphy vs Julia Hall / Kim Wright6-4, 6-1
L#2 DoublesGina Meyer / Tami Socolofsky vs Shawn Cellura Radford / Katy Marcy6-3, 6-1
2019-03-09Won 1–0
W#2 DoublesAndrea Findley / Tami Socolofsky vs Ellen Mulherin / Sharon Reese6-4, 6-2
2019-03-03Won 1–0
W#1 DoublesKayleen Mendenhall / Amy Murphy vs Heather Selis / Mary Logsdon6-1, 6-1
2019-02-24Won 1–0
W#3 DoublesKim Christensen / Tami Socolofsky vs Diane di Vito / Karyn Yaptangco6-4, 5-7, 1-0
2019-02-01Won 2–0
W#2 DoublesKim Christensen / Shannon Lofton vs Sonia Bouchard / Nora Semonsen2-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#3 DoublesChrys Culver / Gina Meyer vs Lillian Lee / Barbara Streeter6-0, 6-3
2019-01-20Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesKayleen Mendenhall / Nancy Stecher vs Elizabeth Domagalski / Michele Hart6-7, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMonica Christensen / Rozita Walsh vs Tara Baumann / Sandie Yamauchi6-3, 6-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesShamera Daugherty / Andrea Findley vs Nora Semonsen / Kimberly Seely6-2, 6-1
2019-01-12Won 1–0
W#1 DoublesKayleen Mendenhall / Amy Murphy vs Marlene Huntsinger / Diane Hardman6-2, 6-1
2019-01-06Won 2–0
W#2 SinglesKim Christensen vs Kelsey Cleveland6-1, 5-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMonica Christensen / Rozita Walsh vs Ellen Mulherin / Christine Horne6-2, 6-1
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.
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.

4
Andrea Findley
95W–44L career
0%91%9%
3.92
4
Kayleen Mendenhall
95W–65L career
0%98%2%
3.84
3.5
Amy Murphy
48W–30L career
0%84%16%
3.48
3.5
Tami Socolofsky
31W–36L career
2%92%6%
3.32
3.5
Rozita Walsh
18W–16L career
13%84%3%
3.19
3.5
Monica Christensen
27W–36L career
8%92%0%
3.14
3.5
Kim Christensen
41W–43L career
17%82%1%
3.13
0
Gina Meyer
28W–17L career
not enough data
—

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.