Teams

Victorious Secret/Nguyen/San Jose

2025 Tri-Level 4.0 · 4.5

13 players · average NTRP 4.70 / NO. CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-03-22vs SunnyWhale/Jin/SunnyvaleWon 30
W#1 DoublesAtsuko Saito / Daisy Hurst vs Lisa Cheng / Julie Silveira6-1, 6-4
W#2 DoublesSilvia Oliveros / Stephanie Wei vs Veeraya Pupatwibul / Kristine Tan6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMcKenzie Helvick / Carolyn Blythe vs Emily Ling / Joany Gao4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#1 DoublesRobin Zhou / Atsuko Saito vs Sabrina Thong / Rina Matsumoto6-1, 7-6
W#2 DoublesErin Kim / Qingqing Zong vs Elaine Smith / Liza Geary3-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMcKenzie Helvick / Carolyn Blythe vs Shelli Skinner / Emily Huang0-6, 6-2, 0-1
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.

Flight standings for 4.5 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 4.27 estimated across 12 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.

4.84
Atsuko Saito
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.61
Cathy Xin
published 5
4.61
Daisy Hurst
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.55
Robin Zhou
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.43
Qingqing Zong
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
4.27
Nicole YEN
published
4.22
Stephanie Wei
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
4.11
Jiayi Shen
published
4.09
McKenzie Helvick
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.98
Helen Lam
published
3.91
Carolyn Blythe
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.65
Iris Xin
published 4
Silvia Oliveros
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Cathy Xin + Helen Lam5159% games+7.4% vs expected
McKenzie Helvick + Carolyn Blythe3454% games+2.1% 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.

5
Atsuko Saito
15W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
no projection at this level
4.84
5
Cathy Xin
16W–6L career · no lines in 2025
no projection at this level
4.61
5
Daisy Hurst
8W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
no projection at this level
4.61
Robin Zhou
10W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%35%65%
4.55
Qingqing Zong
12W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
no projection at this level
4.43
Nicole YEN
7W–8L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
4.27
Stephanie Wei
7W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
5%92%2%
4.22
Jiayi Shen
12W–2L career · no lines in 2025
<1%22%78%
4.11
McKenzie Helvick
12W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
26%73%<1%
4.09
Helen Lam
11W–8L career · no lines in 2025
55%45%<1%
3.98
4.5
Carolyn Blythe
6W–8L career · 2 lines in 2025
73%27%<1%
3.91
4
Iris Xin
99W–36L career · no lines in 2025
14%85%1%
3.65
Silvia Oliveros
5W–0L career · 1 line 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.