Teams

CV-Palm Springs TC/K Rogers & Ramos

2022 USTA Adult 55 & Over - CV · CV Women 7.0

10 players · average NTRP 3.60 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
L#1 DoublesKathy Rogers / Wanda Ramos vs Catherine Lind / Sanae Chance4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2022-03-21vs CV-Toscana/Mulflur & KinneyWon 20
W#1 DoublesWanda Ramos / Deborah Lands vs Rebecca Bratlien / Cynthia Mulflur7-5, 6-0
W#2 DoublesStaci Munic / Kathy Rogers vs Cheryl Burke / Allison Alanis6-4, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDeborah Lands / Wanda Ramos vs Rebecca Brown / Susan Parker6-4, 6-3
W#1 DoublesKathy Rogers / Mary Fox vs Katie Buechel / Kathy Haugh7-6, 7-6
W#2 DoublesKathy Rogers / Susan Caruso vs Debra Creem / Margaret Herman6-4, 6-3
2022-02-07Lost 01
L#1 DoublesKathy Rogers / Celeste Manolas vs Susan Sheridan / Agnes Hoffman6-1, 0-6, 1-0
2022-01-10vs CV-Embassy Tennis Club/SashaWon 20
W#1 DoublesKathy Rogers / Mary Fox vs Karen Gallagher / Kathy McArthur6-4, 6-0
W#2 DoublesWanda Ramos / Celeste Manolas vs Mei Leckenby / Julie Kratzig7-5, 4-6, 1-0
2022-01-03vs CV-Sun City PD/GrovesLost 01
L#1 DoublesWanda Ramos / Mary Fox vs Mona Klimmek / Patricia Taylor4-6, 6-1, 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 CV Women 7.0 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 3.43 estimated across 7 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.

3.70
Amy Springer
published 4
3.56
Kathy Rogers
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.51
Celeste Manolas
published 3.5
3.33
Wanda Ramos
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.31
Doris Hoffmann
published 3.5
3.30
Deborah Lands
published 3.5
3.30
Maria Himelman
published
Staci Munic
published
Susan Caruso
published
Susan Hope
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.

Kathy Rogers + Wanda Ramos1843% gamesnot enough data
Kathy Rogers + Susan Hope5360% gamesnot enough data
Kathy Rogers + Susan Caruso4446% gamesnot 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
Amy Springer
30W–25L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.70
3.5
Kathy Rogers
108W–60L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%31%69%
3.56
3.5
Celeste Manolas
5W–0L career · no lines in 2022
<1%48%52%
3.51
Wanda Ramos
74W–60L career · 5 lines in 2022
1%90%9%
3.33
3.5
Doris Hoffmann
4W–2L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Deborah Lands
2W–1L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.30
Maria Himelman
14W–3L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.30
Staci Munic
1W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Caruso
12W–7L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Hope
15W–13L career · no lines in 2022
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.