Teams

Sonterra Select

2025 18 & OVER SPRING WEEKEND WOMEN · 3.0 Women Saturday

17 players · average NTRP 2.50 / TEXAS

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 →
Schedule1 played
2025-05-31vs Fair Oaks Ranch FlameWon 40
W#1 DoublesMegan Griffin / Shelly Dickson vs Peggy Yoder / CHARLOTTE GARZA6-3, 6-3
W#1 SinglesEmily Galvan vs Debra Gonzalez6-4, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJessica Ison / Shelbi Spears vs Carol Obrien / Stacey Harper6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMargarita Kirk / Mariana Reynoso vs Amy Temple / Amanda Gallegos6-3, 6-4
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.

Flight standings for 3.0 Women Saturday 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 2.83 estimated across 16 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.

3.13
Tanya Power
published
3.10
Kim Bergeron
published
3.09
Shelbi Spears
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.92
Mariana Reynoso
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.89
Jane Mathis
published
2.87
Emily Galvan
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.87
Jessica Ison
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.87
Shelly Dickson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.85
Nora Espinoza
published
2.85
Isamara Taylor
published
2.83
Margarita Kirk
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.79
Michelle Gonzalez
published
2.75
Jordan Funk
published
2.75
Marisol Acevedo
published
2.41
Courtney Connolly
published 2.5
2.29
Teresa Ogrady
published
Elsa Ang
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.

Jessica Ison + Tanya Power224 matchesnot enough data
Kim Bergeron + Jordan Funk314 matchesnot enough data
Kim Bergeron + Nora Espinoza213 matchesnot enough data
Kim Bergeron + Tanya Power303 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.

Tanya Power
29W–15L career · no lines in 2025
<1%17%83%
3.13
Kim Bergeron
12W–13L career · no lines in 2025
<1%24%76%
3.10
Shelbi Spears
20W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%27%73%
3.09
Mariana Reynoso
16W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%72%27%
2.92
Jane Mathis
10W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%78%22%
2.89
Emily Galvan
6W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%82%18%
2.87
Jessica Ison
12W–17L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%82%17%
2.87
Shelly Dickson
8W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%82%17%
2.87
Nora Espinoza
16W–4L career · no lines in 2025
1%85%15%
2.85
Isamara Taylor
9W–6L career · no lines in 2025
1%86%14%
2.85
Margarita Kirk
14W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
1%87%12%
2.83
Michelle Gonzalez
17W–16L career · no lines in 2025
2%91%7%
2.79
Jordan Funk
28W–14L career · no lines in 2025
0%4%96%
2.75
Marisol Acevedo
8W–15L career · no lines in 2025
4%93%3%
2.75
2.5
Courtney Connolly
9W–2L career · no lines in 2025
0%75%25%
2.41
Teresa Ogrady
5W–9L career · no lines in 2025
0%93%7%
2.29
Elsa Ang
8W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data

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.