Teams

SFV - Braemar Babeolats

2022 SoCal Fall Doubles 18+ SFV · SFV - Women 3.5

10 players · average NTRP 3.64 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2022-12-18vs SFV - Hot ShotsLost 01
L#3 DoublesDeborah Kerr-Orlik / Susan Kroll vs Ann Hall / Mindy Schiffman2-6, 3-6
2022-11-13vs SFV - Sets In The CityLost 01
L#1 DoublesCatherine Haggett / Tami Olshan vs Jacque Clendennen / MISSY LOPEZ6-7, 5-7
L#2 DoublesAngela Bladon / Catherine Haggett vs Michelle Wild / Liz Cackowski2-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesChristine de la Hoz / Catherine Haggett vs Ali Laventhol / Carla Denker3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesDeborah Kerr-Orlik / Julie Sato vs Christine Whigham / Ellen Plummer3-6, 4-6
2022-10-08Lost 01
L#2 DoublesCatherine Haggett / Reine Dominique Ntone Sike vs Susan Warner / Stephanie Meyer4-6, 5-7
2022-09-10vs SFV - Simply Smashing 3.5Lost 01
L#3 DoublesDeborah Kerr-Orlik / Tami Olshan vs Jenny Isaacson / Mary Anna Noveck3-6, 2-6
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 SFV - Women 3.5 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 3.35 estimated across 8 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.

3.68
Lisa Cloughesy
published 4
3.56
Melanie Truhett
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.43
Christine Daniel
published 3.5
3.43
Madi Rosenberg
published
3.37
Catherine Haggett
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.20
Amy Gandin
published 3.5
3.18
Christine de la Hoz
published 3.5
2.99
Deborah Kerr-Orlik
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Julie Sato
published
Tina Glantz
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.

Melanie Truhett + Catherine Haggett3450% gamesnot enough data
Deborah Kerr-Orlik + Catherine Haggett033 matchesnot enough data
Christine Daniel + Madi Rosenberg303 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
Lisa Cloughesy
50W–34L career · no lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.68
4
Melanie Truhett
125W–106L career · 16 lines in 2022
32%68%<1%
3.56
3.5
Christine Daniel
15W–14L career · no lines in 2022
<1%71%29%
3.43
Madi Rosenberg
3W–4L career · no lines in 2022
71%29%<1%
3.43
3.5
Catherine Haggett
99W–122L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%85%15%
3.37
3.5
Amy Gandin
0W–5L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.20
3.5
Christine de la Hoz
4W–7L career · no lines in 2022
9%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Deborah Kerr-Orlik
57W–134L career · type A · 3 lines in 2022
54%46%<1%
2.99
Julie Sato
3W–4L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Tina Glantz
0W–1L 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.