Teams

OC LLW/FW The Huntington Club - Jackie

2025 Adult 18 & Over - WEEKDAY WOMEN -OC · OC 3.5W WD

12 players · average NTRP 3.70 / 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 →
Schedule4 played
W#1 DoublesAlicia Logan / Nancy Shih vs Gina Christiansen / Kristin Pechstein6-2, 6-2
2025-05-09Won 10
W#2 DoublesNancy Shih / Alicia Logan vs Jenny Inoue / Naomi Sugiura6-1, 7-6
2025-05-02vs OC El Dorado - LisaWon 10
W#2 DoublesNancy Shih / Alicia Logan vs Cheryl Hansberry / Claudia Shea6-4, 6-1
2025-04-25vs OC Yorba Linda CC - MelissaLost 01
L#2 DoublesLauren Prelesnik / Alicia Logan vs Michaela Ehrle / Sandy Swearingen6-2, 4-6, 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 OC 3.5W WD 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 3.38 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.

3.61
Jane Gibb
published
3.60
Nancy Shih
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.52
Rosalinda Fazio
usually #3 Doubles 29%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.44
Lacey Seward
usually #3 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.42
Annie Clark
published 3.5
3.42
Alicia Logan
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.41
Lauren Prelesnik
published
3.35
Tiffany Pena
published
3.26
Michaela Vitrano
published
3.21
Jacqueline Jernigan
published
3.17
Samantha Bloom
published
3.16
Lisa Wellman
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.

Nancy Shih + Alicia Logan16456% games+1.9% vs expected
Jacqueline Jernigan + Annie Clark4548% games−0.4% vs expected
Rosalinda Fazio + Lauren Prelesnik2542% games−2.1% vs expected
Rosalinda Fazio + Alicia Logan2332% gamesnot enough data
Rosalinda Fazio + Nancy Shih314 matchesnot enough data
Jacqueline Jernigan + Alicia Logan134 matchesnot enough data
Alicia Logan + Michaela Vitrano404 matchesnot enough data
Rosalinda Fazio + Lacey Seward123 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.

Jane Gibb
5W–9L career · no lines in 2025
21%78%<1%
3.61
4
Nancy Shih
67W–52L career · 6 lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
3.60
4
Rosalinda Fazio
96W–130L career · 6 lines in 2025
45%55%<1%
3.52
3.5
Lacey Seward
95W–61L career · 9 lines in 2025
<1%65%34%
3.44
3.5
Annie Clark
6W–13L career · no lines in 2025
<1%71%29%
3.42
3.5
Alicia Logan
47W–44L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%72%28%
3.42
Lauren Prelesnik
11W–12L career · no lines in 2025
74%26%<1%
3.41
Tiffany Pena
2W–5L career · no lines in 2025
1%86%14%
3.35
Michaela Vitrano
12W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%3%97%
3.26
Jacqueline Jernigan
7W–19L career · no lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.21
Samantha Bloom
3W–6L career · no lines in 2025
12%87%1%
3.17
Lisa Wellman
4W–6L career · no lines in 2025
13%86%1%
3.16

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.