Teams

SD 3.5 BTC Sunday Slammers (Sun 2:30)/ Edwards

2026 SoCal Fall Doubles WE- San Diego · SD Women 3.5 GNO

14 players · average NTRP 3.38 / SAN DIEGO

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 →
Flight standings11 teams · SD Women 3.5 GNO
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SD 3.5 Peninsula TC (Sun 2:30)/ Oliva000000
2SD 3.5 SDTRC (Sun 2:30)/ Yu000000
3SD 3.5 SDTRC (Sun 2:30)/ Adams000000
4SD 3.5 The Slice is Right BTC (Sun 2:30)/ Tan000000
5SD 3.5 Coronado TC (Sun 2:30)/ McKissick000000
6SD 3.5 Mtn View (Sun 2:30)/ Limon000000
7SD 3.5000000
8SD 3.5 Mtn View (Sun 2:30)/ Saenz000000
9SD 3.5 Peninsula TC (Sun)/ Carey000000
10SD 3.5 LJTC (Sun 2:30)/ Salyards000000
11SD 3.5 BTC Sunday Slammers (Sun 2:30)/ Edwards000000

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 13 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.

3.44
Pat St Onge
published 3.5
3.40
Megumi Bolger
published 3.5
3.37
Almira MacIas
published 3.5
3.35
Jacinthe Pare
published 3.5
3.31
Michelle VANN
published 3.5
3.31
Elizabeth Estevane
published 3.5
3.28
Ye-Sun Lee
published 3
3.24
Anna Brigham
published 3.5
3.24
Peggy Cuppy
published 3.5
3.10
June Li
published
2.99
Carol Morris
published 3.5
2.80
Amy Rorstad
published 3
2.71
Cathy Edwards
published 3
Linda Olson
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.

Peggy Cuppy + Jacinthe Pare9256% games+5.0% vs expected
Peggy Cuppy + Anna Brigham6950% gamesnot enough data
Jacinthe Pare + Pat St Onge8263% gamesnot enough data
Amy Rorstad + Almira MacIas7351% gamesnot enough data
Jacinthe Pare + Anna Brigham4250% gamesnot enough data
Peggy Cuppy + Pat St Onge1448% gamesnot enough data
Pat St Onge + Anna Brigham3252% gamesnot enough data
Peggy Cuppy + Almira MacIas303 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.

3.5
Pat St Onge
56W–28L career · no lines in 2026
<1%67%32%
3.44
3.5
Megumi Bolger
48W–22L career · no lines in 2026
<1%78%21%
3.40
3.5
Almira MacIas
56W–60L career · no lines in 2026
<1%84%16%
3.37
3.5
Jacinthe Pare
67W–36L career · no lines in 2026
<1%87%13%
3.35
3.5
Michelle VANN
67W–27L career · no lines in 2026
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Elizabeth Estevane
50W–48L career · no lines in 2026
1%92%7%
3.31
3
Ye-Sun Lee
19W–14L career · no lines in 2026
<1%2%98%
3.28
3.5
Anna Brigham
56W–50L career · no lines in 2026
3%95%2%
3.24
3.5
Peggy Cuppy
42W–51L career · no lines in 2026
3%94%2%
3.24
June Li
6W–3L career · no lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.10
3.5
Carol Morris
6W–4L career · no lines in 2026
52%48%<1%
2.99
3
Amy Rorstad
82W–150L career · no lines in 2026
1%93%6%
2.80
3
Cathy Edwards
9W–6L career · no lines in 2026
5%94%1%
2.71
Linda Olson
1W–0L career · no lines in 2026
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.