← Teams

SHC-Christensen/Vedder

2025 Adult 40 & Over · 3.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.5 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.18 estimated across 8 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.

3.33
Ruth Semon
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.32
Tami Socolofsky
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
—
Nicole Vedder
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
—
Rebecca Harris
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.19
Rozita Walsh
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.14
Monica Christensen
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.13
Kim Christensen
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.12
Melanie DeSilva
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.11
Julie Trujillo
published 3.5
3.08
Mary Rudinsky
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Results8 ties
2025-03-15Lost 0–2
L#2 DoublesRebecca Harris / Rozita Walsh vs Jill Eilers / Janae Pyle6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesKim Christensen / Nicole Vedder vs Dory Simons / Julie Kim6-0, 6-2
2025-03-09Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesKim Christensen / Tami Socolofsky vs Sue Edmonds / Puntrigar Suriyaseang7-5, 6-2
L#2 DoublesMelanie DeSilva / Julie Trujillo vs Natalya Ramras / Heidi Palena6-1, 7-5
L#3 DoublesMary Rudinsky / Ruth Semon vs Michele Beaman / Lynne Nieda6-2, 6-1
2025-03-08Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesTami Socolofsky / Kim Christensen vs Lisa Hockman / Tonya Halog6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesJacqui Slominski / Rebecca Harris vs Alison Marr / Tomoko Hori7-6, 6-3
L#3 DoublesRozita Walsh / Nicole Vedder vs Andrea Vicino / Sandi Martes6-3, 7-6
2025-02-08Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesKim Christensen / Tami Socolofsky vs Jing Li / Naun Yvonne Kim6-4, 6-3
L#2 DoublesMonica Christensen / Julie Trujillo vs Marilyn Sims / Christine Moran6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesMary Rudinsky / Eliza Oh vs Lupine Swanson / Jennifer Noble7-6, 6-3
2025-02-08Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesMonica Christensen / Julie Trujillo vs Heather MacPherson / Gail Bolte6-4, 6-1
L#2 DoublesRuth Semon / Mary Rudinsky vs Wendy Nakatani / Emily Vander Ploeg6-3, 6-4
2025-01-25Won 2–1
L#1 DoublesShella Razon-Lumetta / Melanie DeSilva vs Carolyn Bachhuber / Catherine Leedy6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMonica Christensen / Ruth Semon vs Laura Laney / Kim Wright7-5, 1-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesTami Socolofsky / Rozita Walsh vs Peggy Jaques / Nancy Williams6-4, 7-6
2025-01-19Split 1–1
L#1 DoublesRuth Semon / Melanie DeSilva vs Julie Kim / Alexandra Lee6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesKim Christensen / Tami Socolofsky vs Tammy Cofield / Hanny Tan6-3, 6-2
2025-01-11Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesRuth Semon / Monica Christensen vs Tiffany Bowie / Kari Hastings7-5, 6-3
L#3 DoublesMelanie DeSilva / Shella Razon-Lumetta vs Sarah Mutal / Annette Hill7-5, 6-0
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.

3.5
Ruth Semon
51W–32L career
0%99%1%
3.33
3.5
Tami Socolofsky
31W–36L career
2%92%6%
3.32
3.5
Nicole Vedder
32W–37L career
not enough data
—
3.5
Rebecca Harris
8W–16L career
not enough data
—
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
3.5
Melanie DeSilva
46W–38L career · type A
10%90%0%
3.12
3.5
Julie Trujillo
15W–18L career
11%89%0%
3.11
3.5
Mary Rudinsky
50W–42L career
18%82%0%
3.08

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.