Teams

Zap

2024 San Angelo Tri-Level League · Tri-level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.43 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2024-11-13vs StewartLost 03
L#1 DoublesDeborah Simons / Deanne Hume vs Shona Ramos / Whitney Allen2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesJulia Lane / Lorie Balderas vs Miranda Stewart / Jessie Hoak1-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesGinger Granath / Catherine Cuenca-Torres vs Whitney Sherley / Jenna Barnes1-6, 1-6
2024-10-07vs WellsWon 21
W#1 DoublesDeborah Simons / Debra Melott vs Donna Paul / Michelle Kiefer6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLori Dornhecker / Lorie Balderas vs Lela Batten / Kimberly Collins6-2, 6-4
L#3 DoublesCatherine Cuenca-Torres / Bridget Barbee vs Staci Wetz / Sylvia Guadarrama4-6, 4-6
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 Tri-level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Women 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 3.20 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.

3.74
Deborah Simons
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.69
Tina Ashley
published
3.60
Deanne Hume
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.48
Debra Melott
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.47
Julia Lane
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.33
Lori Dornhecker
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.29
Lorie Balderas
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.89
Bridget Barbee
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.87
Catherine Cuenca-Torres
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.83
CoCo Simpson
published 3
2.71
Ginger Granath
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.58
Julie Manuel
published
Sylvia Zap
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.

CoCo Simpson + Bridget Barbee3350% games+5.7% vs expected
Sylvia Zap + Julie Manuel3447% games+4.3% vs expected
Deanne Hume + Deborah Simons261159% games+0.3% vs expected
Lorie Balderas + Lori Dornhecker252052% games−0.8% vs expected
Debra Melott + Tina Ashley7162% gamesnot enough data
Catherine Cuenca-Torres + Ginger Granath2538% gamesnot enough data
Catherine Cuenca-Torres + Bridget Barbee3262% gamesnot enough data
Sylvia Zap + Catherine Cuenca-Torres224 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.

4
Deborah Simons
46W–20L career · 2 lines in 2024
3%94%2%
3.74
Tina Ashley
69W–44L career · no lines in 2024
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Deanne Hume
31W–18L career · 1 line in 2024
22%78%<1%
3.60
4
Debra Melott
36W–27L career · 1 line in 2024
56%44%<1%
3.48
Julia Lane
21W–24L career · 1 line in 2024
60%40%<1%
3.47
Lori Dornhecker
89W–79L career · 1 line in 2024
1%90%9%
3.33
Lorie Balderas
44W–62L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%94%5%
3.29
3
Bridget Barbee
19W–35L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%80%20%
2.89
3
Catherine Cuenca-Torres
26W–51L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%84%15%
2.87
3
CoCo Simpson
23W–42L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%9%
2.83
3
Ginger Granath
17W–53L career · 1 line in 2024
5%93%1%
2.71
Julie Manuel
27W–65L career · no lines in 2024
28%72%<1%
2.58
Sylvia Zap
27W–54L career · no lines in 2024
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.